"David Kastrup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
"amicus_curious" <[email protected]> writes:
"David Kastrup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
"amicus_curious" <[email protected]> writes:
If it fails early, it gets returned to the store or to the
manufacturer for credit.
If your whole computing centre gets compromised because a packet logger
could be inserted into the router, return to the store is your least
problem. Being able to determine possible scope of a security breach is
certainly important.
You create a whole lot of hypothetical situations, but people buy
these things at Sam's Club for $35 and they work just fine.
It is fine that you live in a world without security breaches and
botnets, but there are people that are awake and with responsibilities.
What compromise has there ever been that allowed someone to put a
"packet logger" into the firmware of such a thing? Who would bother?
Uh, I recommed that you read some security advisories regularly if you
are really that computer illiterate.
Does that mean that you cannot point to any such thing? Such handwaving is
not effective argument.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
