full-disclosure - Re: Windows' future (reprise)

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: <AANLkTikteCgIlS-VRLzsXRQwT-8QuawanhSdLS4CtOAP@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 11:06:46 +0100
From: Michael Simpson <mikie.simpson@...il.com>
To: stuart@...erdelix.net
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Windows' future (reprise)

On 17 May 2010 21:49, lsi <stuart@...erdelix.net> wrote:
> My interpretation of risk assessment tells me that if the chances of
> denial-of-service due to malware flooding is small, but the potential
> damage is substantial, despite the improbability, then that risk must
> be mitigated.
>

Then your interpretation / risk assessment may be wrong
The risk of being hit on the head by a meteorite may be small but the
potential damage is substantial, despite the improbability, so that
risk must be mitigated - live in a bunker.
The risk of dying by slipping down the stairs in the morning (~1200
people per year in UK) is small but the potential damage is
substantial - outlaw stairs
The risk of dying putting on your slippers is small (~75 people each
year in UK) but the potential damage is substantial - outlaw slippers

I run windows and i run *nix. IMHO you can mitigate the risks
associated with either to an acceptable level.

mike

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/