"Brian Steele [SPICEISLE]" wrote:
> My challenge is to define "members of the trade" here. We're not
> talking about locks, but software, which by its very nature is easily
> transportable and reconfigurable - and quite easy to duplicate by
> anyone who has access to a computer and a floppy disk (or CD-RW drive
> :-)). Also, if a hacker, by perusing the "open" architecture for a
> security product, chances upon a flaw, then can we rely on him to
> report the flaw to the producer, or more likely use it for his own
> profit?
You are either engaging in intentional fallacy in order to miss a point,
or you're too literal minded. I wasn't talking about locks, either.
Security and openness have been debated for a long time.
Open architecture favors security -- the likelihood of a lone genius
finding a flaw is no greater than that of responsible persons finding
one, probably less. Openness favors a cooperative environment which
is responsive to the need for change.
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
