Blue Boar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Security] is extra. It's extra time and effort. And extra
> testing. And extra backtracking and schedule slipping when
> you realize you blew something. All before it hits beta.
...if you're lucky. (Or if you're doing development right, but IME
that
Mark Graff wrote:
> I have therefore often wondered if we should be talking, not about how
> "secure" a system is, in a static sense, but rather what its security
> half-life is.
Interesting point!
> This reasoning leads me to the
> thought that Mac OS X, for example, is "more secure" than Wi
