Full Disclosure mailing list archives
[Full-Disclosure] why commcerical software *could* be better [WAS: Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux]
From: Gadi Evron <ge () egotistical reprehensible net>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:33:11 -0800
I apologize if this somehow gets to the list twice, I accidentally posted it here with the wrong email address:
> IMHO the open source crowd fixes bugs a magnitude faster than the m$ lusers - check www.guninski.com, >there are dates on which vendors were notified. Check the unpatched exploder page to get an idea.
As much as generally and usually I'd vigorously agree with you, there is a lot to be said for:
1. A serious (note serious) commercial company that has a crew working on addressing security concerns, and updating the product. 2. A commercial company providing with liability (and responsibility) for the software you use (in other words - tech support and someone to blame). 3. No source (!!) available for people to examine, thus making it, to a level, harder to locate security "holes" - for outsides in any case.I can come up with a few more.. but basically all I am saying is, support open source, don't condemn commercial software. There is a difference between the two ideologies, and one should follow/support
whichever suits him/her best. Constructive vs. destructive attitudes? Don't allow bad examples to cloud your better judgment. :o) -- Gadi Evron (i.e. ge), ge () linuxbox org. The Trojan Horses Research mailing list - http://ecompute.org/th-list My resume (Hebrew) - http://vapid.reprehensible.net/~ge/resume.rtf PGP key for ge () linuxbox org - http://vapid.reprehensible.net/~ge/Gadi_Evron.ascNote: this key is used mainly for files and attachments, I sign email messages using:
http://vapid.reprehensible.net/~ge/Gadi_Evron_sign.asc _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux Helmut Hauser (Nov 12)
- RE: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux Edward W. Ray (Nov 12)
- Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 12)
- Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux Jason Coombs (Nov 12)
- Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux Georgi Guninski (Nov 12)
- Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux Jeremiah Cornelius (Nov 12)
- Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux Gadi Evron (Nov 12)
- [Full-Disclosure] why commcerical software *could* be better [WAS: Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux] Gadi Evron (Nov 12)
- Re: [Full-Disclosure] why commcerical software *could* be better [WAS: Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux] Jeremiah Cornelius (Nov 12)
- Re: [Full-Disclosure] why commcerical software *could* be better [WAS: Re: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux] vb (Nov 12)
- Re: why commcerical software *could* be better Gadi Evron (Nov 12)
- Re: why commcerical software *could* be better vb (Nov 12)
- clarification - reasons as to why commercial software *could* be better Gadi Evron (Nov 12)
- Re: clarification - reasons as to why commercial software *could* be better Brent J. Nordquist (Nov 13)
- Re: clarification - reasons as to why commercial software *could* be better vb (Nov 13)
- Re: why commcerical software *could* be better David Maynor (Nov 12)
- RE: Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux Edward W. Ray (Nov 12)
- Re: why commcerical software *could* be better [WAS: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux] Georgi Guninski (Nov 12)
- Re: why commcerical software *could* be better Gadi Evron (Nov 12)