>than 10 year's experience with securing the vehicle, people are still
>finding relatively easy ways to get past the locks and run off with
>the car. Interestingly enough, other manufacturers duplicate his
>design, complete with flaws. Would you purchase from this
>manufacturer?
>Congrats, you've just written off UNIX.
How is this relevent? The original post was not meant to slam NT in particular, it was
saying that it's wise to consider a company's track record when making a decision, and
it pointed out the fallacy of the 'hacker challenge' approach. This group is not the
appropriate place for OS advocacy. For the last few months, there's been way too much
of that here. Enough already. Any OS will be insecure if the admin doesn't know what
he's doing.
The original topic of this thread had to do with 'hacker challenges.' My original
remarks on the subject went something like this: the biggest problem with this
approach is that the people most likely to able to breach any given system are exactly
the ones who will have nothing to do with "hacker challenges." If I were a cracker,
why should I risk detection, or discovery of my methods and weaknesses? So I can own
someone else's box for a while? Big deal. I could learn a lot more by sitting back,
and watching the script kiddies pound away while studying the victim's responses.
Challenges may point out glaring weaknesses, but a carefully conducted internal audit
can do the same thing in a much more reliable, consistent and disciplined way.
Daniel Bell
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
