Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> [...] and discloses a zero-day.

90-day, you mean. It's only zero-day if they had zero days to come up with a solution. That's what "zero-day" means.



But that doesn't sound nearly as cool or media hype-able.


I meant to say that there would be zero days between when I could patch my (hypothetical) Windows machine, and when people could start hacking it. The Wikipedia article you linked elsewhere seems ambiguous, e.g. "It is called a "zero-day" because the programmer has had zero days to fix the flaw (in other words, a patch is not available)." Microsoft has had something up to 90 days to produce such a patch, but hasn't for whatever reason.


[deleted]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-day_attack

> It is called a "zero-day" because the programmer has had zero days to fix the flaw


Did you read what you just linked? Specifically, the part after the open parenthesis? The bit about the patch not being available?

> It is called a "zero-day" because the programmer has had zero days to fix the flaw (in other words, a patch is not available).

Please try again.


Actually, 0-day refers to the time since public disclosure.


If that would be the case then we would have another term for the thing I just described, because that's the worst case scenario.

Anyhow, the Wikipedia article disagrees with you, too. Got any sources for your definition?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: