| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <3F15A786.9040601@ameritech.net> From: dbailey27 at ameritech.net (northern snowfall) Subject: Microsoft wins Homeland Security Bid ( Reuters) > > >>I would hope and think that this would give Microsoft >>more incentive to make their products more secure from >>the begging. I see this as possibly being a benefit to all of >>us (hopefully). >> > >Agreed! Customer demand is the only way that we as a community can >influence the evolution of inherent security controls, whether the target >of discussion is Microsoft or any other product vendor. > That *shouldn't* be how security intensive situations work. Security can *not* be an afterthought based on consumer analysis when going into a forum that is specifically security oriented. Security should have been built into the product from point of conceptualization. Microsoft should not win a security bid because it might give them "more incentive" to make a more secure product. If the product lacks security the product should not be considered for secure solutions: case closed. Thinking of this kind is only perpetuating the problem and disconnecting our community from the solution. The thought process you present here is akin to giving an ex convict a gun based on his word that he wont shoot you once he's got it. The convict must prove that he understands the capability and consequences of utilizing a weapon in a fashion that negates the fabric of a society based on freedom and equality. Don http://www.7f.no-ip.com/~north_
Powered by blists - more mailing lists