In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 06/20/2005
at 12:00 AM, Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>That is a little too strong.
Perhaps, but you might feel different if they were your data at stake.
>Unless you're in a totally unsecured area.
Partially unsecured is good enough for there to be a risk.
>You could/would lose a lot of skilled personal that way.
Presumably they did a risk assessment and decided that the risk of
compromise outweighed the risk of losing good people.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
