|
|
|
|
|
by ZrArm
35 days ago
|
|
> Mythos did in fact write PoCs for all bugs that crash with demonstration of memory-unsafe behavior (e.g. use-after-free, out-of-bounds reads/writes, etc). But report [1] says that "Some of these bugs showed evidence of memory corruption...", which implies that majority of these (which includes 271 bugs from Mythos) don't have evidence at all. Do I not understand something? > For us this is substantial enough evidence to consider it a security vulnerability at that point Mythos is supposed to be pretty good at writing actual exploits, so (as I understand) there shouldn't be any serious problems with checking if bug is vulnerability or not. [1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2026-3... |
|
This is just the standard sentence we've been using for years. It has nothing to do with Mythos and for Mythos, almost all bugs show evidence of memory corruption (we do have a handful of bugs in JS IPC / JS Actors, one is in the blog post).
> Mythos is supposed to be pretty good at writing actual exploits, so (as I understand) there shouldn't be any serious problems with checking if bug is vulnerability or not.
Yes but if we have a choice between writing exploits and scanning more source, potentially finding more bugs, then of course we prioritize the latter.