Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown...
From: Marcus J. Ranum (mjr_at_ranum.com)
Date: 05/21/05
- Previous message: Marcus J. Ranum: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- In reply to: Chuck Swiger: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- Next in thread: Chuck Swiger: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- Reply: Chuck Swiger: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- Reply: Adam Shostack: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: Chuck Swiger <chuck@codefab.com> Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 15:55:29 -0400
Chuck Swiger wrote:
>You've asserted that all standards are useless. You've asserted that standards which do not take security into account are not internet-worthy. You seem to believe that no Internet standard is legitimate and all traffic must be considered dangerous.
OK. Why don't you list for us, real quickly, the internet application
protocols that haven't had a security vulnerability so far.
I'm all ears. Start your engines. Go!
mjr.
(PS - chargen?)
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
- Previous message: Marcus J. Ranum: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- In reply to: Chuck Swiger: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- Next in thread: Chuck Swiger: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- Reply: Chuck Swiger: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- Reply: Adam Shostack: "Re: [fw-wiz] A fun smackdown..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|