full-disclosure - [inbox] Re: CyberInsecurity: The cost of Monopoly

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <200309290609.h8T69XtH014480@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu)
Subject: [inbox] Re: CyberInsecurity: The cost of Monopoly 

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 00:36:42 EDT, Kristian Hermansen <khermansen@...technology.com>  said:

> reason for the lack of security patches.  If there are so few boxes on the
> net with relatively little use, why do we need Netware exploits?  They do
> exist, but who here has ever used one?  If Netware were as popular as
> Windows, I'm sure a whole mess of bugs would be found.

A long long time ago, Netware actually had a significant market share.  It
sucked so horribly that exploits weren't needed (Hint - even Windows for
Workgroups was so much better that it served as the death knell for NetWare).

Netware couldn't have gotten as popular as Windows unless it was rammed down
our throats by a monopolistic vendor who didn't care about what it did to
security.  Oh wait.. isn't that what Geer, Bace, Gutmann, Metzger, Pfleeger,
Quarterman and Schneier were telling us? ;)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20030929/69093359/attachment.bin