Re: Re: Malware sharing? People are full of shit [was: Getyour computer viruses here!]

[Nick FitzGerald <nick () virus-l demon co uk>]

Gadi Evron to Dr Solly:

> > Because the Bad Guy who didn't get it anyway, now can get it.
>
> Assume for a minute what I know to be true.. the Bad Guy HAS IT period.
>
> How would that change your view?

The strongest objections to what Val is proposing are _NOT_ sample 
accessability but open accessability to competent, detailed analysis of 
advanced (by the "lesser" malware authors' standards) techniques.

As I wrote somewhere else in this thread earlier today, _technically_ 
sample accessibility is probably not really a "problem' at all because 
it already happens a great deal and trivial "hexeditor hacks" are dealt 
with pretty well by modern scanners.  (In the big picture I'm still not 
comfortable ignoring the ethical issues there, but purely from the "how 
would our current processes handle this specific aspect of such a 
service?" perspective, the answer is "they'd probably not notice".)

Anyway, even if you're right (which I seriously doubt), you are simply 
removing one of the weaker objections and making no impact at all on 
the stronger objections.


Regards,

Nick FitzGerald

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.