Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks
From: Imhotep (Imhotep_at_nospam.net)
Date: 09/15/05
- Next message: Imhotep: "Re: New Firefox bug (and fix)"
- Previous message: Notan: "Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks"
- In reply to: Bit Twister: "Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks"
- Next in thread: Winged: "Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks"
- Reply: Winged: "Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:10:06 -0400
Bit Twister wrote:
> On 15 Sep 2005 00:06:38 GMT, Unruh wrote:
>>
>> It has always astonished me how the IT industry has managed to avoid the
>> having to pay for their incompetence and sloppyness. From the millenium
>> bug
>
> Since I had to modify code for y2k, I could understand where the
> coder did not think the code would still be running 15 years later. :(
> That and what was taught to them when they were in college. :)
>
>> to all the security holes. No other industry could get away with it.
>
> I would agree. It is a shame that IT management keeps agreeing
> to the End User Licence on the best damn virus magnet software vendor.
Imagine a car company making car with so many flaws. It would be like tires
falling off while drive down the highway (twice a month). Yet they get away
with it. Biggest scam going...
Imhotep
- Next message: Imhotep: "Re: New Firefox bug (and fix)"
- Previous message: Notan: "Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks"
- In reply to: Bit Twister: "Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks"
- Next in thread: Winged: "Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks"
- Reply: Winged: "Re: More tech fails to exorcise security risks"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|