[Dailydave] How Apple orchestrated web attack on researchers

[Daniel]

Firstly I'm not a mac head, i use a tool call Apple. It has it's  
problems just like my Mamiya camera and my toilet. Lets keep the  
insults down to a mature level yeah?

> On 3/20/07, Daniel <daniel at ugc-labs.co.uk> wrote:
>> Tell me George, if you owned a mega corporation and you had two
>> researchers threatening to drop a few % from your share price, what
>> would you do? Open up your arms, give them a free macbook and see
>> millions lost on the FTSE/Nasdaq?
>
> Yea, lets just lie about everything and cover it up. That always works
> out well....


Again welcome to how business is done. 8/10 current top FTSE 100  
companies today make use of aggressive tactics to ensure survival,  
why is IT and this industry any different?
>
>> Apple's PR protected the brand, same as Bush protected his brand and
>> Billy G protected his brand. This is business 101 and it's time for
>> security and security researchers to realise the golden years are
>> long gone in todays litigation market. I can't just walk into Ford
>> and say that all american cars are crap, blow up and kill people
>> without expecting some force, so why do researchers think they can
>> get away with it with this "we are protecting the world" approach?
>
> That comparison makes no sense at all. You are comparing two people
> finding a flaw in wireless drivers with blowing up and killing people.

This is where you miss the point, it's about BRAND PROTECTION. Yes  
the world would be much better if everyone was open, but that doesn't  
happen in the real world. Oracle still bills it's database server as  
unbreakable, are they lying?
>
> Every Machead I debate this with says the same thing. They argue about
> how Full Disclosure is bad for everyone and how all of us are wrong
> and unethical for releasing flaws to the public if a company doesn't
> patch a flaw in a timely and appropriate manner. I'd like to remind
> you that this isn't the first incident where Apple has lied to the
> public about the seriousness of a flaw to protect themselves.

If you actually knew me, you know I support full disclosure. I'm not  
some wet behind the "oooh mummy got me a hacking exposed book, i can  
hack like Dave A now" kid, I've been in this damn industry for a long  
time now. I can give you countless other examples of companies who  
have protected their brand like Apple have done. It's not right, it's  
not clever but this has been happening since the early 1900's (Coke  
is good for you, can fix all your health problems, oooh smoking  
hasn't killed anyone, Firestone tyres are totally safe USA!)


>
> You (and the rest of the Apple community that thinks this way) need to
> wake up. Would you rather us find flaws and keep them to ourselves if
> the vendor decides not to fix it?

Again assumptions are being made about me. I've found flaws, I was  
due to talk about them this month at EUSecWest but things happened  
that prevented me from doing so. I've spent loads on lawyers and  
would have rather spent it on buying a new hasselblad. Do you know me  
at all?

> Thats how the blackhat community
> works, they find flaws and keep them to themselves for later use. The
> blackhat community doesn't give a crap about what the corporations
> think, they have no rules to abide by. If they find a flaw, they keep
> it to themselves and use it when they deem necessary.

Educating anyone on daily dave who actually has been on this list for  
longer than 1 year on how the "blackhat" community works is funny. Us  
old farts remember gov-boi and the "blackhat" sites like hack.co.za,  
hell I even hosted the site back in the day, so yes I'm fully aware  
of how this community works, again please stop thinking im 19 years old.

> There is a good
> chance that a number of these flaws were already known by the blackhat
> community.  Do you feel safe knowing that blackhats have their own
> private collection of exploits that they can use against you? Would
> you rather they continue to have a collection of unpatched flaws?
> Instead of binding the hands of white hats with legal and political
> garbage, you should be encouraging them to find and disclose flaws,
> not cover them up and hide them. People need to be aware of the risk
> to their information.
>

Security research has changed since the 90's, especially in modern  
america and europe. You cannot disclose information today and not  
expect some legal challenge. David and Co found this out the hard  
way, which I do feel for them. This is one reason I will never report  
on any issue i find anymore, It's not worth it.

> Don't get me wrong. I'm all for responsible disclosure, but Apple has
> shown time and time again that they will not act responsibly in
> return. The community needs to be aware of the risks and if Apple
> won't tell the truth, then the community will.


- Cisco
- Microsoft
- Lotus
- Oracle

Shall I go on? Hell ask Dave L or Cesar  about how responsible Oracle  
have been, I don't see any hate articles addressed to Mary Ann.  
Before i retired from IT, 12 years of experience taught me that every  
damn IT company lies. Apple isn't doing something new, why do you  
think RFP wrote his original policy back in the day?


>
> Blackhats already have the advantage, why give them one more by
> binding our hands? Do you REALLY want that risk?

You have totally missed the point of my mail. Everyone in this  
wireless cock-up handled it wrong. Dave and Co did it for the media,  
Apple should have come clean and christ knows, BLOGGERS CAN'T be  
expected to have the same journalistic integrity that traditional  
media does.

This industry is at a crossroads. We need to grow up and mature and  
realise that for every action there is a reaction. Companies are no  
longer willing to accept some researcher blurting out some issue, no  
matter how serious it is, without taking into consideration the  
financial implications.




>
> -- 
> Bow Sineath - bow.sineath at gmail.com