full-disclosure - How secure is software X?

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

Message-ID: <4464B31F.8090003@thievco.com>
Date: Fri May 12 17:09:15 2006
From: BlueBoar at thievco.com (Blue Boar)
Subject: How secure is software X?

Brian Eaton wrote:
> On 5/11/06, Blue Boar <BlueBoar@...evco.com> wrote:
>> Don't we fairly quickly arrive at all products passing all the standard
>> tests, and "passing" no longer means anything?
> 
> I believe that point is called "success."

I was thinking more like all their "security" efforts only went to 
making sure the test reports clean, and they get declared "secure".  Now 
you have two products that pass the tests regardless of relative 
security, or whether one of them was carefully developed with security 
in mind.  Not my definition of success.

					BB