Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

bbc.co.uk

51–60 of 165 posts

Re: Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

#51

"Microsoft's senior director of research Chris Betz said in a blog post.", "Several security researchers", "wrote one developer", "But another said" So is this what the disclosure issue is going to look like when packaged up for the masses? No historical context on how the ongoing disagreements are the latest in decades of ongoing discussion? Or any mention of the events that shaped the popular ideas today? Just a so…

Welcome to the wide and unimpressive world of tech journalism. On the other hand, you get what you pay for.

Re: Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

#52
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it really matter if it's 90 or 92 day disclosure?

> Does it really matter if it's 90 or 92 day disclosure? Yes. Google designed Project Zero to "pressure firms into dealing with security problems more quickly." A firm policy with unambiguous enforcement has its advantages. Muddying the 90-day deadline with questions about when (and for whom) to make exceptions weakens it. For example, in the future, I expect Microsoft will not wait the extra two days in the event of…

I feel certain if this vulnerability had a higher impact (like remote execution) then it would have been over-ridden - or at least responded to quicker.

Re: Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

#54
post #5

This is crazy. By now the world really knows about Microsoft's second-tuesday-of-the-month policy for patches. If Google isn't willing to wait the two additional days such that the patch can be deployed within the regular update window, this means that Google effectively gives MS only 60 days to react and fix issues (because once they missed the second patch day, the vulnerability will be disclosed before the third).…

Microsoft was actually asking for 92 days to fix the bug, not 2 days...

And Google gave them a 90 day deadline. Doesn't seem right not to extend it by only two days, especially if there was a holiday period in between.

Re: Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

#55

What? Microsoft asked for 2 extra days and Google refused? Seems like an asshole move. I am in general a huge Google fan, but in using Google services I realize that I am not much of a customer (I purchase extra storage and buy stuff on the Play Store); advertisers are the customers. Microsoft on the other hand gets its money from computer users and it seems like they have a much more customer focused mentality.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

#56
post #5

This is crazy. By now the world really knows about Microsoft's second-tuesday-of-the-month policy for patches. If Google isn't willing to wait the two additional days such that the patch can be deployed within the regular update window, this means that Google effectively gives MS only 60 days to react and fix issues (because once they missed the second patch day, the vulnerability will be disclosed before the third).…

There's no question that the hard 90-day deadline of Google's Project Zero is undermined by collisions with holidays and other calendar events, but Patch Tuesday is a restriction that Microsoft imposes on itself and its users. They had advanced warning and an opportunity to work within the limits of their own policy or roll out an unscheduled update.

Even so, this is a clash of two policies and Google needs to reevaluate its deadline (is 120 days better for everyone, including users?).

Re: Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

#58

What? Microsoft asked for 2 extra days and Google refused? Seems like an asshole move. I am in general a huge Google fan, but in using Google services I realize that I am not much of a customer (I purchase extra storage and buy stuff on the Play Store); advertisers are the customers. Microsoft on the other hand gets its money from computer users and it seems like they have a much more customer focused mentality.

or, Google asked for 90 and Microsoft refused. Who's the asshole?

(neither, or both)

Re: Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

#59
post #5

This is crazy. By now the world really knows about Microsoft's second-tuesday-of-the-month policy for patches. If Google isn't willing to wait the two additional days such that the patch can be deployed within the regular update window, this means that Google effectively gives MS only 60 days to react and fix issues (because once they missed the second patch day, the vulnerability will be disclosed before the third).…

Microsoft was actually asking for 92 days to fix the bug, not 2 days...

Google gave them 90 days (by Google's policy). Microsoft had the fix, but asked for another 2 days in order to fit within their patching cycle. Google decided to take action outside of Microsoft's (well established) patch cycle.

Then again what does Google care, they don't use or support anything Microsoft, so it doesn't affect them.

Re: Microsoft hits out at Google team over bug report

#60
post #5

This is crazy. By now the world really knows about Microsoft's second-tuesday-of-the-month policy for patches. If Google isn't willing to wait the two additional days such that the patch can be deployed within the regular update window, this means that Google effectively gives MS only 60 days to react and fix issues (because once they missed the second patch day, the vulnerability will be disclosed before the third).…

> By now the world really knows about Microsoft's second-tuesday-of-the-month policy for patches.

Which is a dumb policy for security patches. When its fixed it should be released.

> If Google isn't willing to wait the two additional days such that the patch can be deployed within the regular update window, this means that Google effectively gives MS only 60 days to react and fix issues (because once they missed the second patch day, the vulnerability will be disclosed before the third).

Google doesn't dictate Microsoft's patch releasing policy. 90 days are 90 days. Microsoft doesn't have "only 60 days", they have 90 days like anyone else, and they chose to miss it by adhering to a policy of their own choosing that makes security patches less timely.

The whole purpose of a fixed 90-day window is to give reasonable time to fix a security vulnerability but also to create pressure to do so timely. Making exceptions for vendors to accommodate existing policies that make security fixes less timely would both increase the effort for Google (as a fixed time window is always easier to implement than one that varies with each vendors policies) and undermine the whole purpose of the 90-day timeline.

Post reply on HN