2008/4/27 Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > In respect of that, I'd suggest a dedicated system (server) which would > have strict access controls in every respect (including the management > utility). I could offer to build and host such a system at a well secured > locality for a domain like https://ca.mozilla.com/ or alternatively to have > that system at Mozilla (but dedicated server). Obviously I have lots of > knowledge in this field and I'm ready to offer this utility from A-Z (except > the physical server if hosted at Mozilla). However I wouldn't accept a > virtually hosted system (aka vmware) which Mozilla does often. >
Why would you not accept a virtually-hosted system? The benefits of virtual machines (including "if the hardware goes down, the VM can be brought up again with a minimum of fuss") are many and varied, especially for an organization like Mozilla -- while the risks of having a physical machine in the datacenter behind the firewall, not under the same administrative control or jurisdiction are very high. I am curious what your rationale is. -Kyle H _______________________________________________ dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
