undefined

points

by zorked7 hours ago |

comments

by TacticalCoder4 hours ago|

[-]

> your shell escape isn't a big deal

You can't have it both ways: if it's not a big deal, then he can publish it.

If you say "Don't publish", then you acknowledge that it's a big deal.

I say to GP: "Congrats for finding a shell escape, it's always a big deal. But don't publish it... Yet".

Give them a chance to fix it. But it they don't even answer to the emails, even just saying: "thx we're busy we can't fix right now but will do", then at some point you just publish.

It doesn't take long to answer an email saying "thanks, we'll fix it eventually".

by Suzuran2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

"We'll fix it eventually" is not good enough. If a human can find a flaw, then a bot can find the same flaw, and the bots are always watching and always testing. If someone can't commit to immediate security response when running a public-facing internet service then they should not be running that service, because the rest of the internet will not forgive them when their machine gets popped and becomes everyone else's problem.

If they can't commit to a hard timeline of less than a few days, then publish. What happens next is not your fault - it was inevitable anyway.

Edit for clarity: This is just in general, not specifically SDF or small orgs or large orgs. The internet does not care about the difference. The internet just does not care period. Nobody is going to give anyone else any breaks, and especially not a botnet.