bugtraq - Your Opinion

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <000e01c767fb$b1ca35e0$097393d1@MyBabies>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:48:30 -0000
From: "Mark Litchfield" <Mark@...software.com>
To: <bugtraq@...urityfocus.com>, <vulnwatch@...nwatch.org>,
	<full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>
Subject: Your Opinion

I have heard the comment "It's a huge conflict of interest" for one company 
to provide both an operating platform and a security platform" made by John 
Thompson (CEO Symantec) many times from many different people.  See article 
below.

http://www2.csoonline.com/blog_view.html?CID=32554

In my personal opinion, regardless of the vendor, if they create an OS, why 
would it be a conflict of interest for them to want to protect their own OS 
from attack.  One would assume that this is a responsible approach by the 
vendor, but one could also argue that their OS should be coded securely in 
the first place.  If this were to happen then the need for the Symantec's, 
McAfee's of the world would some what diminsh.

Anyway I am just curious as to what other people think.

Thanks in advance

Mark