nanog mailing list archives

Re: Cisco IOS Exploit Cover Up


From: Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:48:57 -0400


On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 01:36:01PM -0400, James Baldwin wrote:
On Jul 28, 2005, at 10:14 AM, Scott Morris wrote:
While I do think it's obnoxious to try to
censor someone, on the other hand if they have proprietary internal
information somehow that they aren't supposed to have to begin  
with, I don't
think it is in security's best interested to commit a crime in  
order to get
tighter security.


Lynn developed this information based on publicly available IOS  
images. There were no illegal acts committed in gaining this  
information nor was any proprietary information provided for its  
development. Reverse engineering, specifically for security testing  
has an exemption from the DMCA (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/ 
DVD/1201.html).

That being said, what information is he not supposed to have? All the  
information he had is available to anyone with a disassembler, an IOS  
image, and an understanding of PPC assembly.

If anything, the only "crime" he may or may not have committed is  
violation of an NDA with ISS, which should a contractual, civil issue  
not a criminal one.

        I think that's why it was a restraining order and not
damanges in the amounts of billions, but IANAL.

        Same way people were asked to not disclose who the half-blooded
prince was.  I'm not saying it's right, but that's up for the
judge(s) involved to decide.

        As far as Cisco goes, I know it takes them some time to fix
bugs, but generally speaking they need to "fix them faster".  But this
can be said for most vendors.

        - jared

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared () puck nether net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.


Current thread: