Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft
From: "David Kierznowski" <david.kierznowski () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 10:39:53 +0000
David, Interesting paper. I do have a couple of points though: a. Your graphs show the number of risks found, however, it would be interesting to note the comparison in the severity of risks found. So I did a quick count on issues =~ (overflow) (format string): Microsoft SQL Count 39 Oracle Count 19 b. You also mention SDL being the reason as to why Microsoft have had so few issues. It seems to good to be true that SDL would really solve all these problems, then again maybe it has. Looking at my comments above (see a.), could I not suggest that some of these issues are not re-occuring due to stack protection being implemented in XP2 and Windows 2003? Kind regards, David Kierznowski _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft David Litchfield (Nov 20)
- Re: Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft endrazine (Nov 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft David Kierznowski (Nov 21)
- Re: Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft David Litchfield (Nov 21)
- Re: Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft Alexander Kornbrust (Nov 21)
- Re: Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft David Litchfield (Nov 21)
- Re: Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft Alexander Kornbrust (Nov 21)
- Re: Which is more secure? Oracle vs. Microsoft David Litchfield (Nov 21)