MS, MAC and others were around before the net was what it is today thus the
security dictated that it was closed source.
MAC just recently got into open-source with X and eventually MS will as
well.
I do think that it may make for a more stable environment if it were
open-source but I doubt it would make it hack proof at all. I just don't see
that as a possibility.
As for the encryption, I remember learning that years ago and finding it
hard to swallow then as well.
If I installed a security system in my house I wouldn't want to be the one
to test it. I know where the weak and strong points would exist. That would
nullify the test altogether. I would rather have somebody come in (like a
robber would do) and try to get in. They may be able to research the system
I used but may not be aware of the details of the house layout and what
other traps might exist.
A true hacker is going to work like a robber and not an insider. They have
to piece the puzzle together and seldom have all the pieces (hence the word
hacking).
-----Original Message-----the weakness
From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 12:16 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: OT - Windows NT source code
I disagree, open source makes OS much safer than closed source OS. Everyone
can inspect the code and point out problems with open source, not so when it
is closed. Thus, MS has a problem when its source gets suddenly released --
people will most likely find a lot of holes in it which were long time ago
fixed in open source OS. It can be compared to a person that lived in a
bubble their whole life getting exposed to the outside world for the first
time -- might catch something pretty quickly.
Also, security through obscurity is no security at all. One of the oldest
principles in encryption states that one should test the system under the
conditions where the attacker is assumed to have full knowledge of the
system.
TK
-----Original Message-----
From: Schuster, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 12:00 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: OT - Windows NT source code
How many companies with over 1,000 employees (and PC's) have you been with
that ran Linux, FreeBSD or something similar on the desktop?
The answer is: "Not a whole lot".
So, if most business runs MS on the desktop they rely on it. There are
enough hacks out there now without the source code causing problems. If
somebody had the source code they could cripple industries that relied on
the platform rather quickly.
Our jobs are time consuming enough without the added pressure of 16 year
old
kids writing viruses all day aren't they.
If Linux was the most used OS in the world you better bet it wouldn't take
long for exploit after exploit to hit that platform. With it being open
source that simply makes the job that much easier.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Rohan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 11:51 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: OT - Windows NT source code
Riddle me this:
If you can get Linux, FreeBSD, etc source code 24 hours a day 7 days a
week and that is not a security risk, why is a leak of ( | )icrosoft
code such a huge security leak? Could it be they have really bad code,
or perhaps they don't want you to see the back door they put in to all
there OSs... um... well makes you wonder.
On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 06:52, cfhelp wrote:
> Even though I am going to probably have to deal with an increase in
Hacks
I
> think this may be a good thing, as it will force M$ to get off there a$$
and
> fix more in OS. Well then again I could see them saying Windows 2003
fixs
> all.
>
--
Vale,
Rob
Luxuria immodica insaniam creat.
Sanam formam viatae conservate!
http://www.rohanclan.com <http://www.rohanclan.com>
<http://www.rohanclan.com>
http://treebeard.sourceforge.net <http://treebeard.sourceforge.net>
<http://treebeard.sourceforge.net>
http://ashpool.sourceforge.net <http://ashpool.sourceforge.net>
<http://ashpool.sourceforge.net>
_____
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
