Re: [Full-Disclosure] Is the FBI using email Web bugs?

From: Azerail (Azerail_at_supersecretninjaskills.com)
Date: 01/09/04

  • Next message: Bill Weiss: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11" 
    To: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 01:34:29 -0800

    On Thu, 08 Jan 2004, bryce wrote:

    > Azerail wrote:
    > >On Thu, 08 Jan 2004, Jonathan A. Zdziarski wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>>Actually, my email client "mutt" makes me feel quite safe. Is there
    > >>>something I am overlooking?
    > >>
    > >>Lack of features != security
    > >>
    > >
    > >
    > >I'm sorry, you've just proved beyond a doubt that you don't know what
    > >you are talking about. Sorry to have to put it like that, but there
    > >it is.
    > >
    > >Azerail
    > >
    >
    > Ok Azerail, if you feel that Johnathan's statement is so incorrect as to
    > be insulting, then prove him wrong.

    Challenge accepted.

    > Share with us why you feel that LoF != security.

    That's not what I was making my statement about, I was talking about
    mutt having lack of features. If one is inclined to respond to a
    statement with another statement that not only is wrong, but grossly
    inaccurate, I don't feel it's inappropiate to call them on such. In
    addition, I never said that LoF != security, he did. Stop trying to
    be so quick to write a post that you think is going to put me on the
    spot and practice some reading comprehension.

    Maybe you should use a MUA that uses threads, like mutt. It'll help
    you keep track of these things.

    > Logically and statistically(sp)the more lines of code in a
    > program, the greater the chance of a bug. And you can't add features to
    > a program without adding code( if anyone has proven me wrong on this i
    > would love to talk to you about it ;) ). Thus by adding features to a
    > program you are adding in bugs(although we try otherwise).
    >
    > What is wrong with this logic???

    Nothing expect that that is not what he said. He said that a "lack of
    features != security. Your statement, which is indeed quite logical,
    only argues the point opposite Johnathan's. What you are arguing is that a
    lack of features enchances security. lack of features = security, not
    lack of features != security. Again, practice some reading
    comprehension. I apologize to Johnathan for the curtness of my post,
    I had a long day and that was the first email I saw when I got home.

    Next time, if you want to defend someone else's arguments by daring
    someone to prove otherwise, don't let the inital argument that you
    launch be the direct opposite of the argument that you are defending.

    Azerail

    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

  • Next message: Bill Weiss: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion to static interface)
      ... one-true-standard for what that OS security feature set should be. ... So you can wish for the "main OS security features" all you want, ... Same reasons for Posix File Capabilities providing a segmented SUID ... Main OS security features always made tight by the LSM. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Is 6.0 released?
      ... and others were security features ... Integrity, and a variey of hardening policies, and also support for Access ... CAPP Audit implementation. ...
      (comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc)
    • Re: linux box compromised: advice needed
      ... > stapling new features onto it, ... > security review and control. ... And that's why SMTP-Auth and STARTTLS for qmail are third-party patches ...
      (comp.os.linux.security)
    • Re: Looking for a Wireless Video Camera
      ... spending more money does give one more features and ... security system) for any real security use. ... I once had a conversation with a former bank network admin who is also ... doubling the cost of the camera system would not yield a proportional ...
      (alt.internet.wireless)
    • Re: Linux for Kids
      ... complex ACLs and other features. ... Many of the features are not currently ... security model a lot further than it is actually implemented in the ... Windows developer has never seen anything more complex than Windows 95, ...
      (comp.os.linux)