I've seen a lot of security people sticking to "this is not an 0day you idiots" retort, downplaying the importance of the leak. Frankly I think that's a pedantic argument that ignores too much of the real world.
The NSA leaks contained previously undisclosed security vulnerabilities that were patched only because they were stolen. In MSFT's case it was less than 30 days, and they basically skipped a patch week to make it happen.
It's manifestly obvious that 0day and 30day can both be considered extremely dangerous in the real world.
Small correction: Nearly everything in WikiLeaks Vault 7 material was already patched (With the exception of something Cisco related which has since been patched I believe). The Vault 7 content was from CIA.
This issue is apparently based on a more recent leak by the Shadow Brokers, containing content from NSA and some other DoD elements who worked on offensive cyber operations.
The NSA leaks contained previously undisclosed security vulnerabilities that were patched only because they were stolen. In MSFT's case it was less than 30 days, and they basically skipped a patch week to make it happen.
It's manifestly obvious that 0day and 30day can both be considered extremely dangerous in the real world.