-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
> After all, didn't attackers also have access to powerpc systems to build
> attacks on during the same timeframe that Symantec suggests? Does the
> powerpc architecture provide some inherent protection against (say) stack
> smashing than the x86 does?
I'm not a PowerPC expert, but everything i have read indicates that it
is not any more secure than the x86 architecture. No NX bit, for
example. I think the comments are based solely on the comparative
installed user base, as You observed.
-&
- --
GPG key / Schlüssel -- http://simultan.dyndns.org/~arjones/gpgkey.txt
Encrypt everything. / Alles verschlüsseln.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFD2lKIoI7tqy5bNGMRA/EvAJ9HXD+ojMPQIIP6bwbzbtb5ce/+AACgnblz
iXHGvSO4Ttv+HOKrYwzhd9o=
=89q4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L)
[email protected]
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
