Re: Security people are leaches. [sic]

[Adrien Kunysz <adrien () kunysz be>]

On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 01:46:07PM +0200, Peter Busser wrote:
> A secure system is one which is implemented to EXACTLY fit its specification,
> nothing more, nothing less.

Then we are back to "all bugs are security bugs and there is no point in
trying to make any distinction".

Linus is obviously not interested in trying to make the distinction,
you are (although your argumentation seems broken). Linus manages the
Linux kernel, you don't. You can keep arguing but I doubt it will
make much change regardeless of who is right (not that I fully agree on
how Linus is handling (security) bugs or people).

Can we go back to discuss interesting technical stuff now please?
I like this paper http://vanish.cs.washington.edu/research.html
and I think it hasn't been posted here yet. It isn't really
breakthrough research or anything (despite what you could expect
from the title) but it's an interesting combination of existing
technologies although the application field seems rather limited and
not really corporate or government-friendly.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave