Re: Re: hello
| From: | Robert Cummings | Date: | Fri, 09 Jan 2009 07:01:25 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: hello | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-285806@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 23:28 +0000, Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Skip Evans wrote:
> > Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> >>> think about it for a minute; an OS can either be secure (0
> >>> vulnerabilities) or insecure (1 or more vulnerabilities); as all OS's
> >>> have 1 or more vulnerabilities they are all equally insecure; because
> >>> they are all insecure.
> >>>
> >
> > What you are saying, in real world terms, not your Binaryland, is that
> > if OS A has 2 vulnerabilities that not many people now about, and OS B
> > has a whole slew of the posted all over the web that they are both
> > equally insecure.
>
> exactly; they are both insecure, one is not "more insecure" or
> "insecurer" - if you make a web app it's either secure or insecure; if
> you make an operating system it is secure or insecure. On the flip side
> as an OS owner, a single barely known vulnerability is just as much a
> worry as 100 well known vulnerabilities.
No, this is not a proper comparison. If I have an insecure web app that
alllows someone to see another user's real name, and another insecure
web app that allows execution of root commands... then I have differing
levels of insecurity.
Thank you, please try again.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP