At 06:59 07/05/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Have you all heard anything about win64?
Yes.
> Do have any faith that MS is
>changing to become a more security aware company?
No. I am however sure that MS has become a company which -claims- it is
more security aware. But MS has always been guilty of bolting-on
functionality to its OS's, rather than building it into their cores. Thats
not something you can do with security. It would rather add features
(.NET) than solve core issues.
> MS is staking its life on
>.NET and Win64.
For Microsoft, revenue is driven by forcing the user to
upgrade. Thus their business model depends on the Next New Thing .NET and
Win64 are the Next New Things.
> They are working hard to change.
I disagree. They are working hardest to attempt to force the
consumer into believing they have no other choice; because their
intellectual property will be taken away from them if they use something
else, because it is illegal to use something else, because it is dangerous
to use something else. Even because it is "unAmerican" to use something else.
> *nix has been around for
>a long time, it is rediculous to think that it would not be secure.
Longevity does not imply security. Good design does.
> MS
>would never release any software if it had to be bug free before release.
What about "acceptably bug free" because they decided against
adding yet more 'features' which were actually security holes.
>No other software get used by more people, so it is no wonder that more bugs
>are found in it than anyother software.
Several things determine the number of bugs found. The overriding
one is the number of bugs present.
> Point being that there are bugs and
>security flaws in *nix also that have not been found for lack of use.
So you say its been around longer, so it is secure, but less
people use it so the bugs cant have been found. Huh?
> MS
>plans to use Win64 and .NET to compete with the *nix Java solutions. Do you
>think that they are going to ignore security as a selling point, for
>themselves or for *nix against them?
As a selling point? No they won't ignore it. But what will they
be selling? Ask yourself if the marketing is actually going to say much
more than "Buy .NET because its more secure than what we sold you last
year" and whether they'll actually even deliver that.
>MS knows that it HAS TO solve its
>security problems to compete in the enterprise solutions arena.
Windows NT is over 8 years old. Why have they only -just-
discovered the necessity of solving security problems? Is 'lets fix a bug
month' a -real- attempt to solve security issues, or just a dumb PR stunt.
> The have
>the money, the man power, the motivation, and the skill to get it done. The
>only question is will you all buy it.
They've alwyas had the money, the manpower and the skill. I
-dont- buy the fact that they've somehow suddenly got
motivated. 'Security' at MS is merely the buzzword of the day.
SxA
_______________________________________________
Perl-Win32-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: http://listserv.ActiveState.com/mailman/mysubs
