Re: [Full-disclosure] iDefense Q-1 2007 Challenge

[Tim Newsham <newsham@xxxxxxxx>]

>    More importantly, the company that I am working with is no different
> than iDefense. In fact, they both sell their exploits and harvested research
> to the same people. The only real difference is in the amount of money that
> the researcher realizes when the transactions are complete. This difference
> is a direct result of low corporate overhead.
[...]
> IDefense is reselling these exploits to the same third parties as the
> business that I work for, or at least I assume that they are. Both 
iDefense
> and our buyers use the exact same list of software targets.

Is there a reason you are withholding the name of the company you work
with?  Inquiring minds want to know.  We all know about iDefense.
(The added secrecy makes one suspicious...)

>    Lastly, all transactions require that the researcher engage the company
> that I work with in a tight contract. This contract ensures that both
> parties are legitimate and also protects both parties. They don't do that on
> the black market do they?

Surely someone who was going to break one law would have no qualms
about breaking another (ie. contract law)...

Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/