[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Managing Innovation

• To: 'John Cowan' <jcowan@r...>
• Subject: RE: Managing Innovation
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 08:45:16 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

They are.  They mean, easy to compromise.  The 
positions of those who say security problems 
on the WWW reside with MS aggravate them because 
they know several of these systems in detail 
and consider claims like that political.  Any 
system can be hacked and security bugs show 
up in all of them.   The issue of the monoculture 
is real enough, but not a catastrophe.  One 
could make the claim that securing one system 
is all that is needed, but the facts say 
otherwise.  There is also something to the 
'cowboy coding' mentality claims.  There is a 
distinct lack of maturity evident in many of 
the companies producing Internet-aware code.

Smart professionals realize that the security 
problems have to be solved by common effort 
on every system.  The more we can do to help 
each other, the faster this will be solved. 
The more time and bits we waste on the Ban 
IE campaigns and other nonsense, the faster 
only one of the affected systems will be 
secured.

len


From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@r...]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) scripsit:

> Many Unix experts sitting here dispute that. 
> They tell me Unix is the most easily hacked operating 
> system they've ever worked with.   Spy Vs Spy.

Are you sure they are using "hacked" in the same sense you are?  
Unix folk tend to deprecate "hack" = "break in"; see
http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/H/hack.html and
http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/C/crack.html .

--

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Managing Innovation
    • From: David Megginson <dmeggin@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Beyond Ontologies
• Next by Date: RE: Managing Innovation
• Previous by thread: Re: Managing Innovation
• Next by thread: RE: Managing Innovation
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread