agreed regarding the RHEL version!

i just dont understand huffing and puffing over "os as g" in a 10-line poc script, and saying "well i would never approve this". its not enterprise code. its not code that will ever be used anywhere else, for anything. its sole purpose is to prove that the exploit is real, which it does!

the rest of the information is in the actual vulnerability report. the poc is a courtesy to the reportee, so that they can confirm that the report itself isnt bullshit.

evidently, given the downvotes i am getting, people think exploit scripts should be enterprise quality code. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ half of the reports i see flowing through mailing lists dont even have a poc.

amazingly HN-like to be upset about a variable name

▲

asdfaoeu an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I don't anyone is saying it's not "enterprise" it's just that they clearly went out of their way to make it less readable. By all means advertise the golf'd line count but just have the non minified script.

▲

akdev1l 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Disagree because to run the PoC you really ought to understand what it’s doing.

And this code is not readable at all. It is failing at letting people confirm the exploit easily.

▲

john_strinlai 2 hours ago | parent [-]

>Disagree because to run the PoC you really ought to understand what it’s doing.

that is contained in the report, which will look similar to the blog. the maintainers will have an open line of contact with the reporters as well. the poc is a small part of the entire report. its not like the linux maintainers only received this poc and have to work out the vulnerability from it alone.

>It is failing at letting people confirm the exploit easily.

it confirms the exploit incredibly easy. just run it, and you get confirmation.

	▲	akdev1l 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		what the blog says and what the code does are two different things. For all I know the blog itself is a honey pot. I need to know what the code does before I run it.