On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 07:07:53 -0000, security curmudgeon said: > On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote: > : Of course, getting a CVE for that issue would have forced disclosure of > : the bug too, quite possibly before the vendors were ready to ship > > Huh? Apparently you don't know how CVE assignment works. > > If you request one from CVE, they can assign one without knowing any > details of the vulnerability. CVE will embargo the details until the > researcher and/or vendor are ready. I assume the Candidate Numbering > Authorities would be able to do the same, but going to Red Hat, Debian or > Ubuntu in this case may not be the best option. Yes, but to make the CVE actually *useful*, they need to eventually release it. Sure, I may have 5 or 10 CAN in my pocket - and I can even wave around CAN-2009-3439 and say 'Death of Internet Predicted'. But for the CAN/CVE to be *useful*, it needs to be disclosed.
Attachment:
pgpC6Mldkj_xs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/