On Tue, 4 Feb 2003 12:32:29 +0000, Dougie G Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think that the prerequisite is a user community for the OS that >demands >> that security holes be fixed, and a developer who is committed to fixing >> the holes. IBM isn't perfect, but they have been taking security >> seriously for quite some time now. It remains to be seen whether >> Microsoft is truly committed to security, or whether it is just doing a >> PR exercise. The Microsoft user community does not seem to be demanding >> that holes be fixed. > >You can say that again. The commitment for zSeries, S/390�, z/OS, and >OS/390� dates back to 1973. >http://www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/zos/security/systemintegrity.html That is true in concept, although fuzzy in the details. In 1973, S/370 virtual had just been delivered, there was DOS/VS (born of DOS), VS1 (first born of MFT), VS2 R1 (or SVS - first born of MVT). MVS came a few years later. [No one talks about FS any more...] In the late 1970s, IBM made a public commitment to resolve any problems related to security/denial of service/etc ... in MVS. Now MVS begat OS/390, which begat z/OS etc etc. It was the commitment to cure security holes which made the difference. john alvord
