So, if software is dependably bad and can dependably be counted on to fail, it's secure?
Especially if it resists attempts to compromise such dependability? On Jul 15, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Goertzel Karen wrote: > I've been struggling for a while to synthesise a definition of > secure software that is short and sweet, yet accurate and > comprehensive. Here's what I've come up with: > > Secure software is software that remains dependable despite efforts > to compromise its dependability. > > Agree? Disagree? > > -- > Karen Mercedes Goertzel, CISSP > Booz Allen Hamilton > 703-902-6981 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) > SC-L@securecoding.org > List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/ > listinfo/sc-l > List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/ > charter.php _______________________________________________ Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
