On Sat, Aug 16, 2003, burns wrote: >On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 14:07, Bill Campbell wrote: > >> The people who deploy Windows systems on the Internet should be held >> accountable for endangering their organization's data and systems (not to >> mention lost productivity while waiting for Windows systems to reboot >> unnecessarily). It's not like these worms are any surprise. I know I've >> been warning people of the dangers of using Windows on public networks for >> at least ten years now. > >What you say is true - and if it can be proven that Microsoft has >callously endangered their customers' systems - and those customers were >not aware of MS's general security limitations beforehand (there is the >rub), then they should be sued.
Microsoft is free to sell anything they want, but it's the responsibility of the corporate management to insure they are protecting their company's assets. I'm not aware that ignorance is a valid argument to get out of irresponsible behaviour. It's certainly no secret that Windows systems are insecure, at least amongst computer and networking professionals with a clue (which eliminates most people with MCSE certification). We don't sell Windows to any of our customers, and have always strongly recommended that if they have to use Windows for some applications that they should at least make sure the data's on a secure Unix or Linux platform. We also strongly discourage their using Microsoft Outlook, generally installing Eudora, Sylpheed, or use Netscape for e-mail. >But why does that give virus-spawners free rein? Why are we also making >excuses for those who knowingly and intentionally cause damage to >systems? To offer another analogy: I may be stupid for going to a bad >part of town late at night, but that also doesn't change the fact that a >person that sticks a knife in that me is still guilty of assault or >murder. One person's negligence is not an open excuse for others to >damage that person's systems and/or property. I never said it was, but I do say that knowling running Windows on public networks could well be considered as an ``attractive nuisance'' at best, and perhaps akin to maintaining publically accessible machine gun nests given their vulnerability to tools which can be used to disguise the identity of the criminals using them. Bill -- INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676 URL: http://www.celestial.com/ With Congress, every time they make a joke it's a law; and every time they make a law it's a joke. -- Will Rogers _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
