What Responsibility do Anti-Spyware Researchers Have?

Use Netsparker


Ethical debates are always interesting, and people have gotten in trouble lately for reverse engineering and various other branches of research.

This is a fairly old topic, but as I’m clearing out some old drafts, I still find it an interesting one.

There’s been an ongoing debate in security circles concerning how security researchers should disclose vulnerabilities for a long time, Darknet is of course in the Full Disclosure school of thinking. The common viewpoint is that the researchers should disclose the vulnerabilities to the company, giving them some time to fix the problem.

Typically, however, if nothing is done to fix the vulnerability, then researchers eventually will disclose it publicly. That’s where a lot of the conflict occurs, and there are even some questionable laws that might get you in trouble for publicly discussing a vulnerability. However, does this apply to spyware research as well?

The main question is, should the vulnerabilities ever be posted publically? I of course say yes, as if I’m using that software, I have the right to know there’s something wrong with it and take remedial measures, even if there’s no patch (that’s the beauty of open source, you can patch it yourself!).

There was a lot of conversation during the 180solution period about responsible disclosure and disclosing the affiliates used to install spyware, someone 180 always manage to spin it into a self-serving press release about how they triumphed over evil.

Ah ethics, always an interesting topic.

The whole thing became a virtual war between a high profile security researcher and the spammy 180solution folks.

The sniping between a controversial adware company and a prominent anti-spyware researcher continued Thursday as 180solutions defended its practices and called critic Ben Edelman “irresponsible.”

Earlier this week, Bellevue, Wash.-based 180 solutions, which distributes software that delivers ads to users’ computers, blasted Edelman, a Harvard researcher, for improperly disclosing a hack into the company’s installation software. Last week, Edelman had posted an analysis of an illegal download of 180’s Zango software by an affiliate Web site of 180’s advertising network.

You can read more here.

Posted in: Legal Issues, Malware

, , , , , , ,


Latest Posts:


SCADA Hacking - Industrial Systems Woefully Insecure SCADA Hacking – Industrial Systems Woefully Insecure
airgeddon - Wireless Security Auditing Script airgeddon – Wireless Security Auditing Script
Airgeddon is a Bash powered multi-use Wireless Security Auditing Script for Linux systems with an extremely extensive feature list.
Acunetix v12 - Pause & Resume Acunetix v12 – More Comprehensive More Accurate & 2x Faster
Acunetix, the pioneer in automated web application security software, has announced the release of Acunetix v12 - more comprehensive, accurate & 2x faster.
CloudFrunt - Identify Misconfigured CloudFront Domains CloudFrunt – Identify Misconfigured CloudFront Domains
CloudFrunt is a Python-based tool for identifying misconfigured CloudFront domains, it uses DNS and looks for CNAMEs which may be allowed to be associated with CloudFront distributions.
Airbash - Fully Automated WPA PSK Handshake Capture Script Airbash – Fully Automated WPA PSK Handshake Capture Script
Airbash is a POSIX-compliant, fully automated WPA PSK handshake capture script aimed at penetration testing, it is compatible with Bash and Android Shell.
XXEinjector - Automatic XXE Injection Tool For Exploitation XXEinjector – Automatic XXE Injection Tool For Exploitation
XXEinjector is an XXE Injection Tool that automates retrieving files using direct and out of band methods. Directory listing only works in Java applications.


Comments are closed.