Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-03 Thread Michael Silk
On 5/2/05, Kenneth R. van Wyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Silk wrote: I honestly don't believe that the consumers will _EVER_ care, and I don't believe that should have to. At most maybe they should just need to keep an eye out for a sticker, or star-rating (government approved) or

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-03 Thread Crispin Cowan
ljknews wrote: At 8:05 AM -0400 5/2/05, Kenneth R. van Wyk wrote: Yet, despite that pessimistic outlook -- and the survey that forked this thread -- I do think that companies are demanding more in software security, even though consumers are not. Companies value time spent on cleanup more

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-02 Thread Michael Silk
Inline.. On 5/2/05, Jeff Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What really mystifies me is the anlogy to fire insurance. *Everyone* keeps their fire insurance up to date, it costs money, and it protects against a very rare event that most fire insurance customers have never experienced. What

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-02 Thread ljknews
At 8:05 AM -0400 5/2/05, Kenneth R. van Wyk wrote: Yet, despite that pessimistic outlook -- and the survey that forked this thread -- I do think that companies are demanding more in software security, even though consumers are not. Companies value time spent on cleanup more than consumers do.

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Crispin Cowan
Greenarrow 1 wrote: But, the problem I see with this survey is they only polled 1,000 out of what over 5 million users in the USofA. Political pollsters regularly sample 1000 Americans to get a prediction of 100,000 voters that is accurate to 5% or so. 1000 people should be sufficient to sample

RE: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Arian J. Evans
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 2:32 PM To: SC-L Subject: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable This makes it highly unlikely that software companies are about to start dumping large quantities of $$ into improving software

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Dave Aronson
Crispin Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ISPs could also position a non-restricted account as an expert account and charge extra for it. That already happens in many cases, except they call it a business class account. The only one I've heard called some kind of expert account is that

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Jeff Williams
What really mystifies me is the anlogy to fire insurance. *Everyone* keeps their fire insurance up to date, it costs money, and it protects against a very rare event that most fire insurance customers have never experienced. What is it that makes consumers exercise prudent good sense for fire