Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 21:36:24 +0100 From: Paul Robinson <paul@iconoplex.co.uk> To: Kevin Lyons <kevin_lyons@ofdengineering.com> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "TrustedBSD" addons Message-ID: <20040629203624.GW34683@iconoplex.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <40E1D15B.5040605@ofdengineering.com> References: <40E1A6C0.2040406@ofdengineering.com> <40E1B3B5.1020906@palisadesys.com> <40E1B7A3.3040409@ofdengineering.com> <20040629201433.GV34683@iconoplex.co.uk> <40E1D15B.5040605@ofdengineering.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 03:30:19PM -0500, Kevin Lyons wrote: > Is there an ACM or IEEE article that quantifies this? You can not write an accurate assessment of potential vulnerabilites, only discovered ones. It does not take a genius to work out that it only takes one line of badly written code to introduce a vulnerability. It does not take a genius to realise that badly written code is as much a management issue as any other. It certainly does not take a genius to asset that well written code impregnable code is well written and impregnable no matter how many lines of code it is made up of. > >"Of late"? You've *JUST* noticed? Wow. :-) > > I will rephrase, I noticed enough to finally comment. Even so. :-) -- Paul Robinson http://www.iconoplex.co.uk/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040629203624.GW34683>