[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [stable] Linux
    Tiago Assumpcao wrote:
    > Casey Schaufler wrote:
    >> Ted Tso, Stephen Smalley and I are all recognized as security experts
    >> and we can't even agree on whether sockets are objects or not, much
    >> less what constitutes a security bug and even less what is likely to
    >> be a security bug. Goodness, there are some of us who would argue
    >> that since DNS is itself a security bug it is just not possible for
    >> DNS to have a security bug, as an example.
    >>> In most cases, they are easy to spot.
    >> Err, no, in the kernel environment a real security flaw is likely to
    >> be pretty subtle.
    > You do not hesitate in categorizing yourself as something as obscure
    > as... what's that term again? "Expert".

    Actually, I always hesitate before calling myself an expert,
    in spite of the credentials I have to back the title. Too
    many people seem to think that if you disagree with their
    point of view you can't know what you're talking about.

    > But then you fail on basic pragmatism when attempting to define what,
    > nearly always, is a true or false question?

    HeeHeeHee. Security questions are almost never true or false,
    black or white, on or off. SPAM is *the* major computer security
    issue and it has nothing at all to do with computers or security.
    Is a use of strcpy() a security vulnerability? Sure it can be,
    but in reality it almost never is, but the hysteria associated
    with buffer overruns gave it a bad oder.

    > Jeez ;)

    It's not so bad. We'll be OK. Really.

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-07-16 07:29    [W:0.023 / U:7.712 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site