> No one ever said the internet had to be secure. Nothing is intrinsically > secure. Doors do not come with locks on them; you have to add your own > security. If you have something to protect then you damn well better > figure out how you are going to protect it. If you leave the protection > to someone else and that protection fails, you have only yourself to > blame. > > At some point consistency is much more important than diversity. > Predictability is not necessarily a failing; often it is a > blessing.
If I encode this message to keep it secure, there had better be a corresponding decoder at Ed's end, or the post will be totally unreadable. As long as the Internet is a two-way system, some part of "protection" is going to be beyond the individual's contral. And if I use an anti-virus and/or firewall that I haven't written myself, am I abdicating some of my responsibility? If we can agree that rolling one's own system software isn't necessarily a good idea, then we have to trust (not blindly) authors and vendors to provide an appropriate level of security. To the extent that M$'s monopoly has made it more difficult to choose more secure software, that's a problem. -Jerry Wolper [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
