>> Perhaps some lucky folks can still get away with it: if so, great. > If you think those who have to, by virtue of commercial need or > policy, run "wide open and only deny known bad" networks are "lucky", > you have an odd definition of luck.
I think rsk wasn't so much talking about those for whom it's "yeah, the costs are high, but the costs of not doing so are for us even higher" as much as those for whom it's more "that's odd, the costs are so low for me it's still practical". And, by that reading, I agree with him. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mo...@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
