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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0309291838350.17524-100000@stratigery.local>
From: eballen1 at qwest.net (Bruce Ediger)
Subject: [inbox] Re: CyberInsecurity: The cost of
 Monopoly

Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
> > As I said, I also think that Micro$oft is as insecure as my 8
> > y/o daughter playing with a handgun.

And then, On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Schmehl, Paul L replied:
> Your daughter wouldn't be insecure playing with a handgun if she had had
> proper handgun safety training.  Wouldn't the same be true of computer
> users?

I realize you're from Texas and everything, but are you nuts?
An 8-year old with a handgun should cause vast feelings of insecurity
in you, with or without proper training on her part.

Besides that, what do you mean by "proper safety training" for a computer
used?  If you mean the failed "don't click on any attachments, don't
open email from someone you don't know" recipe-style of training, then no
to that too.

That recipe-style "training" is what got us into the monocultural pickle
we're in today.  We don't need training, we need more people to know
and understand more than "I just want to get my job done, and MSFT
products are the best", point-n-click power-user training.