Re: [Full-disclosure] defining 0day

[n3td3v <xploitable@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 8:02 PM, Gadi Evron <ge@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  Okay. I think we exhausted the different views, and maybe we are now able
> to come to a conlusion on what we WANT 0day to mean.
>
>  What do you, as professional, believe 0day should mean, regardless of
> previous definitions?
>
>  Obviously, the term has become charged in the past couple of years with the
> targeted office vulnerabilities attacks, WMF, ANI, etc.
>
>  We require a term to address these, just as much as we do "unpatched
> vulnerability" or "fully disclosed vulnerability".
>
>  What other such descriptions should we consider before proceeding?
> non-disclosure?
>
>         Gadi.
>

I just caught a news article that summed up nicely what 0day means...

"A zero-day flaw is a software vulnerability that has become public
knowledge but for which no patch is available. It is particularly
dangerous since users are exposed from day zero until the day a vendor
prepares a patch and notifies users it is ready."

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/144803/chinese_blogs_detail_zeroday_flaw_in_microsoft_works.html

Regards,

n3td3v

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