Comments on: Thank God for Honey Monkeys http://spiresecurity.com/?p=568 Risk and Cybersecurity Analysis Wed, 21 Aug 2013 23:28:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Pete http://spiresecurity.com/?p=568&cpage=1#comment-859 Pete Tue, 09 Aug 2005 12:39:16 +0000 http://spiresecurity.com/blog/?p=568#comment-859 To clarify: it is unlikely for anyone in our profession to have details (not a swipe against Adam).

]]> By: Pete http://spiresecurity.com/?p=568&cpage=1#comment-858 Pete Tue, 09 Aug 2005 12:38:03 +0000 http://spiresecurity.com/blog/?p=568#comment-858 Anything that indicates suspicion or belief rather than fact is fine w/ me. Of course, he may have facts, but my experience has been that that is unlikely.

]]> By: Axel Eble http://spiresecurity.com/?p=568&cpage=1#comment-857 Axel Eble Tue, 09 Aug 2005 07:02:16 +0000 http://spiresecurity.com/blog/?p=568#comment-857 If Adam had written “We’ve always expected that there’s lots of exploit code…” – would you have been fine with that? ;-)

]]> By: adam S http://spiresecurity.com/?p=568&cpage=1#comment-856 adam S Tue, 09 Aug 2005 03:51:01 +0000 http://spiresecurity.com/blog/?p=568#comment-856 Ummm, from page 2 of Lemos’ article:

In early July 2005, the project discovered its first exploit for a vulnerability that had not been publicly disclosed, the researchers said in the paper. The attack used the JView profiler vulnerability that Microsoft announced later in July. Known as “zero-day” exploits, such attack methods could be especially pernicious if widely used before Microsoft updated its user base with protections.

]]>