3Com to Buy Security Flaws? 105
Zonoprh writes "CNET reports that 3Com's TippingPoint division is starting a pay-for-vulnerability program called the Zero Day Initiative. It seems 3Com plans to use the vulnerabilities they purchase to fuel signatures in their protection technologies, in addition to sharing the same data with other security vendors. From the article, "Money has increasingly become an incentive for hackers. Program's such as TippingPoint's offer a legitimate way for them to get paid for their bug hunting. There is also an underground market for vulnerabilities. Cybercriminals pay top dollar for previously undisclosed flaws that they can then exploit to break into computer systems, experts have said.""
"Will deal only with reputable researchers" (Score:5, Insightful)
So I gotta wonder how they are gonna determine who is reputable and who is not ...
Re:"Will deal only with reputable researchers" (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"Will deal only with reputable researchers" (Score:2)
Why wouldn't they sell to the highest bidder then turn around and sell it to tipping point as well? There is after all no honor among most thieves. The only reason that they might not do this is to protect their right to future deals with the underworld, but if they can find a way to sell the information anonymously in both cases then it would be like selling arms to both sides in a conflict,
Re:"Will deal only with reputable researchers" (Score:5, Insightful)
Give us your identity, and your bug, we give you the money. Sounds fair.
Open Source = disreputable researchers (Score:2)
Good idea (Score:5, Interesting)
SunOS - Solaris (Score:3, Interesting)
IIRC, Sun did this with the early versions of Solaris. The transtion from SunOS to Solaris was really painful, especially wrt. SunOS binary compatibility. Now that I think about it, it could have just been a bounty on compatibility problems.
yes, it worked for me... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Good idea (Score:2, Interesting)
If I remember correctly they offered $500 for each security flaw in the mozilla browser or something.
Re:Good idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Speaking out of experience. The company I used to work for reported to them a serious security flaw on their switches in 1998 and as a result I ended up filling the boot of a midsize station wagon with kit. The 3Com country rep opened the storage room with the demo gear and told the beancounters who had some objections to shut up. Some of it was new, some of it bargain bin age and quality. Considering that the cost was 0 we did not really care. Most of it got used. They also
Re:Good idea -translation (Score:1)
Re:Good idea (Score:2)
Re:Good idea (Score:1)
Re:Good idea (Score:1)
Wow (Score:4, Funny)
Simple solution (Score:5, Insightful)
What was the famous counterfeiters name that the FBI hired to spot fakes? He was the basis for the movie 'Catch me if you Can'.
Allow them to use their powers for good, because if you don't, they will continue to use their powers, in whichever direction (good or bad) that they can. The big companies might as well use them as a tool (and pay them) to create/maintain better secured software.
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Simple solution (Score:4, Interesting)
Brazen, fearless and with a personality to charm the socks right off of you, if he had stuck to cons he might well never have been caught (bad paper leaves a paper trail). Having once caught him keeping him caught proved to be a bit of a problem and on one occasion he simply talked his way out of prison
It isn't listed in his IMDB entry (which he has by virtue of being the author of Catch Me if You Can), but he once made an appearance on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson and so impressed me that it is one of the few Tonight Show interviews that has always stuck with me.
I haven't read the book, so it may well be the blurb that is at fault, but certain discrepencies between the book blurb at Amazon and things he said in that interview suggest to me that he's never really given up the con game and we'll never know what is the truth and what is the self generated myth about him.
He should have gone into politics.
KFG
Re:Simple solution (Score:1)
Re:Simple solution (Score:1)
KFG
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Simple solution (Score:2)
If I knew a company I did business with was using some kid who breaks into other people's systems for fun to safeguard my personal data, I would quit doing business with said company. It's one thing to hire them as a contracted penetration tester, it's an entirely different thing to hire them full time to guard your sensitive data. Maybe you were referring to the former, in which case I can agree with you.
Clearing house for bugs Nice idea however (Score:5, Insightful)
Worse yet (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Worse yet (Score:2)
Re:Clearing house for bugs Nice idea however (Score:1)
With any bug submitted we *could* see an announcement a day later (or whenever the check clears), but remember that 3Com says they're only gonna accept submissions from reputable sources. I bet that leaking information would kind of mark you as disreputable.
In any case, let's say we have a 24 hour time lag from when some guy submits it and he publicly announces it. It's still gonna take more time for wor
OT: Hershey Highway (Score:2)
Re:I gave them money (Score:2)
So to summarize (Score:4, Insightful)
Hmmm, great business model...
Re:So to summarize (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems a pretty sound business model to me.
Re:So to summarize (Score:2)
Re:So to summarize (Score:2)
Re:So to summarize (Score:2)
Nah. There will still be plenty of vulns in software until developer organizations start to make secure coding a priority. Even then, there will still be security problems made by well meaning people.
In addition, there will always be unpatched systems for whatever reason
Re:So to summarize (Score:2)
Did I read that right? (Score:1, Insightful)
This reminds me of mob "insurance".
"You know, if you don't pay us to protect you, something bad could happen to you."
Anyone else see a moral issue here?
Re:Did I read that right? (Score:3, Insightful)
Secondly, there is no mob insurance: 3com won't crash non-subscribers' computers after making threats, they'll tip people who discover already existing vulnerabilities, and get money from other people to tell them early about them. Take your tinfoil hat off already, gee...
Re:Did I read that right? (Score:1)
And you think that 3Com will share the details (early) with their competitors so that their customers can be protected too?
No, I think we're on the way to having "exclusive" vulnerability protections.
Re:Did I read that right? (Score:2)
And who would leak them? 3Com? if they did, they'd quickly get sued, or their program would go bust.
And you think that 3Com will share the details (early) with their competitors so that their customers can be protected too?
Again, if they discriminate against their competitors, it'll be noticed very quickly and the program will lose credibility.
No, I think we're on the way to h
Did *I* read that right? (Score:2)
That's like AOL founding the "^_^Rofloffle Institute for Instant Message Research".
More likely scenario... (Score:1, Interesting)
1) Some hackerpunk writes the new and improved FloobleSchnork worm, which attacks, crashes and spreads thru Cisco switches and routers running IOS.
2) 3Com buys the intellectual property of this worm from the hackerpunk and develops a solution to defend against it.
3) 3Com, of course, patents the holy crap out of their solution in such a matter so that nobody else can implement any form of solution whatsoever to defend against the worm. The USPTO, in their brilliant wisdom, gran
So they buy the vulnaribilities (Score:3, Interesting)
1. 3-com makes an offer and the researcher (nice name for a change) accepts it, and keeps his mouth closed.
2. Another researcher (who wishes to stay anonymous) already submitted this bug
It would be nice if they said like how much the bases is what they are willing to pay, and that you can look in the bug database (probably just on some kind of specific property so you can recognize the bug).
However I do like the ZDI platinum bonus: Blackhat training in Las Vegas (with the $20.000 bonus, should be a good few days (-: )
DIY funding (Score:5, Insightful)
Obligatory comment (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Obligatory comment (Score:2, Funny)
2. Notify 3com of security flaw
3. Wait 5 working days
4. Profit
Re:Obligatory comment (Score:1)
1) Deliberately create security flaw in Windows.
2) Break into government and competitors systems.
3) ???
4) Profit!
But more likely the security errors they make are purely accidental. Microsoft do use some rotten business tactics occasionally, but I'm sure they wouldn't go as far as to deliberately make it easy to compromise Windows. If they were breaking the law in this way and got caught, it would do their reputation a lot of damage.
Writing secure sof
Re:Obligatory comment (Score:2)
and the owner? (Score:1)
Re:and the owner? (Score:2)
They need to expand the program already to involve the white hat community (at least).
Are they building up Intellectual Property (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Are they building up Intellectual Property (Score:3, Informative)
From their FAQ (http://www.zerodayinitiative.com/faq.html [zerodayinitiative.com]):
Why are you giving advance notice of the vulnerability information you've bought to other security vendors, including competitors?
We are sharing with other security vendors in an effort to do the most good with the information we have acquired. We feel we can still maintain a competitive advantage with respect to our customers while facilitating the protection of a customer base larger than our own.
Re:Are they building up Intellectual Property (Score:2)
Since they are competing with money... (Score:1)
Will they be able to match what the underground organizations' that they are trying to compete w/ - buck for buck - for the love of a black-hat?
Once you've stolen a couple of thousand credit card numbers, you can quite easily buy vulnerabilities - because no one's really accountable to the money you spend.
Companys such 3Com on the other hand have limited budgets, albeit big budgets but limited none the less. How will 3Com explain it to their customers and shareholders when a hacker sells a vulnerabil
Re:Since they are competing with money... (Score:3, Insightful)
And if you discover a pattern in one of your suppliers wherein a vulnerability they sell you always shows up with the blackhat organizations at the same time... well, that's why you required traceable identity information before you paid them.
The law, in this case, acts as the stick. Money, as always, is the carrot.
Missing step found! (Score:3, Funny)
Step 2: Insert sneaky vulnerabilities
Step 3: Sell bugs to 3COM
Step 4: PROFIT!!!!
Money where their mouth is (Score:2, Interesting)
This is a double-edged sword (Score:3, Insightful)
And on the other hand, there is a lot of potential for abuse. We could see vulnerability stuffing in open source to get a kick-back (I know it's hard to believe it could happen, but remember - there is money involved), we could see 3com dissing people on the bounty checks which could motivate the hacker to turn the vuln into a worm more quickly to get back at 3com and then there is just the fundamental philosophy that 3com is rewarding someone for doing something bad.
We're going to have to wait to see how this plays out over time. It doesn't seem like a good idea to me, but then 3com has to be able to compete with the big boys now that they own Tipping Point.
Jerry
http://www.cyvin.org/ [cyvin.org]
Just had an idea... (Score:2, Funny)
Danegeld? (Score:3, Interesting)
(worked for a time, anyway).
Chip H.
No `advanced notice' for open source code? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't like the sound of this:
This clause seems to indicate that no open source projects are going to benefit from this `advanced notification' scheme. Since patches to open source code are, well, open source, they'd be construed as revealing the nature of the vulnerability, and so 3com won't release the vulnerability information. I really don't like the fact that this clause seems to be giving closed-source products and vendors a leg up when it comes to security notifications.
Now This Makes Sense (Score:1)
Re:Now This Makes Sense (Score:1)
It's called cleanroom programming [wikipedia.org] (it's also known as "zero defect" see my school's [nmt.edu] cs427 about half way down the page)
Zero Day Initiative (Score:2)
The biggest issue I see (Score:1)
Perhaps I'm just paranoid, but why would I send them the full details on an exploit without any guarantee back from them? If there was a way to negotiate a deal before providing them the code, it would be alluring, but bein