On Friday 10 October 2003 13:52, Jaco Swart wrote: > This woman is fed-up: > > http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/2003-10-07-msftsuit_x.htm > > and I wish her well! > > rgds > Jaco
I'm sorry, but I don't agree. So microsoft make lousy software; it's her choice to use it. I think saying she doesn't have any choice but to use it is a pretty weak argument. Secondly, I think it's unreasonable to expect companies to sell "secure" products. Mainly because what is secure today, at the time of shipping, isn't a few months down the track. Security is a process, not a product, right? So it's the user's responsibility to keep up with patches. Too many people are still running the default install months or years after release, without any patches, without even a firewall. These people won't be any safer running Linux either. It's up to people to take responsibility for themselves. If they really need security and don't have the knowledge to keep up with it themselves, then they should pay someone who does. Otherwise they shouldn't be silly enough to keep sensitive information like SSN numbers on their computer :) I wish her well raising awareness about Microsoft's lousy security, but I don't think she's going to win this court case, nor should she. Much as I dislike Microsoft and would like to see them take a fall, I don't think they're the criminals here (note that's "here" - very different from saying they're not criminals full stop ;-) - the crackers who stole her SSN number are the criminals. I don't mean to rant, but this seems akin to blaming the builder of your house when you get burgled, instead of the burglar. What makes it worse is that 90% of people leave their front door wide open, and I suspect will still be inclined to blame the builder if they see others doing it :-) Cheers, Gareth
