Re: [fw-wiz] You'll never get fired for recommending IBM - sorry - Microsoft

From: Breno Jacinto (breno_at_gamebox.net)
Date: 12/16/03

  • Next message: MHawkins_at_TULLIB.COM: "RE: [fw-wiz] You'll never get fired for recommending IBM - sorry - Microsoft" 
    To: MHawkins@TULLIB.COM
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 13:35:01 -0300

    * MHawkins@TULLIB.COM (MHawkins@TULLIB.COM) wrote:
    > Hi Marcus,
    >
    > Regarding monoculture, let me use a common analogy. My car is no more or
    > less secure than any other car because it's a car among several
    > manufacturers, with hundreds of car alarm manufacturers and products,
    > services. Imagine a world for car thiefs where 99% of the cars are made by
    > one manufacturer and car alarm manfacturers are only allowed to stick their
    > alarms in the passenger compartment. No security device is allowed under the
    > hood. There'd be more stolen cars per day than the public would be willing
    > to accept. Things would change. The monopoly would be broken up.

       I used to think like this. But notice the sentence: 'No security device is allowed under the
    hood.'. If we go to computers, this is false. You can run the firewall
    of your choice, as well as AV, and implement the security policy you want.
    And thats the point where monoculture doesnt matter.

       Yes, M$ is lousy when it comes to security. They spent more money on
       cosmetics than on security. But imagine that Apple had the monopoly,
       and MacOS X was run by 99% of the world, wouldn't it be the same
       thing? If people dont care about security, ANY system will be
       insecure, even the paranoid OpenBSD.

       The point for Blaster being such a success wasnt for Windows
       Monoculture. It was because people werent running any firewall to
       simply block 135 or worse, wasnt even *AWARE* port 135 was open in
       his computer. This is what has to be changed! Security is not tied to
       an specific OS, its tied to a decent policy and user education and
       proper use of security technologies.

     
    > Should we accept the same in the computer industry?
    >
    > Can anyone think of a monopoly of a manufacturer good like Microsoft has
    > today?

      No this is no good. But it is exageration to say that because of this
      the Internet is insecure. It's bad 'coz M$ manipulates people, forcing
      an endless (free software is changing it) dependency game. But this is
      too off-topic :).

    > Mike H

    cheers,

    // Breno Jacinto
    // breno@freeunix.com.br
    // Key fingerprint = A5C3 3B22 140D C973 6AC6 2D62 2318 B8FA 15F9 D3FC
    // Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the
    // ark; professionals built the Titanic. -- Anonymous

    _______________________________________________
    firewall-wizards mailing list
    firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

  • Next message: MHawkins_at_TULLIB.COM: "RE: [fw-wiz] You'll never get fired for recommending IBM - sorry - Microsoft"

    Relevant Pages

    • Graduate Students Unlock Code of Thiefproof Car Key
      ... Graduate Cryptographers Unlock Code of 'Thiefproof' Car Key ... team that plans to announce on Jan. 29 that it has cracked the security ... An executive with the Texas Instruments division that makes the systems ... Variations on the technology used in the chips, ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • RE: Wireless Security
      ... Subject: Wireless Security ... ::: In the situation you mentioned, a person was allowed to use the car. ... :: "10-keys" of coke delivered to them at THAT address. ...
      (Security-Basics)
    • Re: locked out of XP, need file access
      ... Security through obscurity is not the solution I was soliciting from the ... search the internet efficiently while targeting the car of choice. ... forgotten the admin password to both my w2k machines at home. ...
      (Security-Basics)
    • Re: Florida cops: and a merry f--kng Christmas to you too
      ... richard wrote: ... Mall security has absolutely no sensitivity in helping when the need ... behind his expensive car. ... Gosh, Richard, could that be because "mall security informed police they ...
      (misc.legal)
    • Re: Controversial paper - Good response article on ZDNet
      ... >>you are liable if someone then steals your car and runs over someone. ... >their doors or their cars. ... >implement good security, but you're wrong. ... ICF is far from effective. ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Quantcast