[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180122194156.gficsy3pnsvyrlaf@matica.foolinux.mooo.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 11:41:56 -0800
From: Ian Zimmerman <itz@...y.loosely.org>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed?
On 2018-01-22 17:20, Mikhail Utin wrote:
>> Keeping it individual without public announced maximum embargo time
>> would also help prevent folks from jumping to 0daying everything per
>> default:)
> However, to me it is pure "Security by Obscurity" in a bit different
> wording. It never worked. Simply think that somebody else knows the
> secret and with your help continues using that.
I think you misunderstand the parent post.
Nobody is proposing that the embargo period for any _particular_ issue
be secret. The proposal in the parent post was to not have a public
general embargo policy for _all_ issues present & future.
--
Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet,
if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup.
To reply privately _only_ on Usenet, fetch the TXT record for the domain.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
