Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://infosec.exchange/users/wdormann/statuses/111879654226761366">Will Dormann (wdormann@infosec.exchange)'s status on Tuesday, 06-Feb-2024 00:59:07 JST</a><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@wdormann" title="wdormann@infosec.exchange"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/232810-48-20240116185707.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="Will Dormann" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">Will Dormann</a><div><ul><li></ul></div></section><article><p><a href="https://cyberplace.social/@GossiTheDog">@GossiTheDog</a> <br>Counterpoint:<br><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@seajay/111879635522838535" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://infosec.exchange/@seajay/111879635522838535</a><br>Vendors allowed to assign new CVEs to old vulnerabilities gives them the ability to hide their negligence in keeping their software up to date.  🤔</p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/2680515#notice-5313056">In conversation</a><time datetime="2024-02-06T00:59:07+09:00" title="Tuesday, 06-Feb-2024 00:59:07 JST">about 10 months ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@wdormann/111879654226761366" rel="external" title="Sent from infosec.exchange via ActivityPub">infosec.exchange</a></span></span><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@wdormann/111879654226761366">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><article><header><div>No result found on File_thumbnail lookup.</div><h5><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@seajay/111879635522838535">chris farrell (@seajay@infosec.exchange)</a></h5><div> from <span>chris farrell</span></div></header><div>@wdormann Assigning a new CVE to an old vuln is like claiming the emperor without clothes is wearing a “new” outfit this Tuesday, ignoring the fact that he’s been parading the same non-outfit for a year. This practice is an attempt to get out of addressing and resolving underlying vulnerabilities directly, instead relying on obfuscating the issue with a superficial, redundant label.</div><footer></footer></article></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
Will Dormann (wdormann@infosec.exchange)'s status on Tuesday, 06-Feb-2024 00:59:07 JSTWill Dormann
- Kevin Beaumont
@GossiTheDog
Counterpoint:
https://infosec.exchange/@seajay/111879635522838535
Vendors allowed to assign new CVEs to old vulnerabilities gives them the ability to hide their negligence in keeping their software up to date. 🤔
In conversationabout 10 months ago from infosec.exchangepermalink
Attachments
1. No result found on File_thumbnail lookup.
  chris farrell (@seajay@infosec.exchange)
  from chris farrell
  @wdormann Assigning a new CVE to an old vuln is like claiming the emperor without clothes is wearing a “new” outfit this Tuesday, ignoring the fact that he’s been parading the same non-outfit for a year. This practice is an attempt to get out of addressing and resolving underlying vulnerabilities directly, instead relying on obfuscating the issue with a superficial, redundant label.

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice