Drew wrote: >It can be, and it is. But, so is just about everything. It is the >probability of the risk being exploited that really matters, and in >this case I see that as a small one. Now, lets talk about using >Microsoft as a security benchmark... ;-) Reminds me of an obscure Steve Martin routine..."Hi, I'm Fred! I have a bank! Ya got fifteen hundred? I'll put it, uh, over here, in my white suit." BJ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=3710&t=3666 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- FW: security opinions please [7:3666] Eric Rivard
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: FW: security opinions please [7:3666] Brian
- Re: FW: security opinions please [7:3666] Drew Simonis
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] Drew Simonis
- Re: FW: security opinions please [7:3666] Jim Gillen
- FW: FW: security opinions please [7:3666] Eric Rivard
- RE: security opinions please [7:3666] Carroll Kong
- Re: FW: FW: security opinions please [7:3666] Jim Gillen
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] andyh
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] Bradley J. Wilson
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] Jacques Atlas
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] Robert Nelson-Cox
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] Jacques Atlas
- RE: security opinions please [7:3666] Robert Nelson-Cox
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] ccnawan
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] simonis
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] ccnawan
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] Robert Nelson-Cox
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] Brian
- Re: security opinions please [7:3666] Allen May

