🚀 go-pugleaf

Donald Becker (becker@cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov) wrote:
: In article <3pioet$8g2@clark.net>, Stephen Balbach <stephen@clark.net> wrote:
: >I would think security would be an issue with Linux - that is the one 

: That's a curious assertion.
: I've not seen a security hole intentionally inserted by a kernel developer.

: IMNSHO, because of the source availability and the widespread examination of
: each kernel change, slipping a security hole into the Linux kernel would be
: more difficult than with most other kernels.

I agree with Donald.  Because the source code is available and lots of people 
use it world-wide any security hole should be found fairly quickly and the person
who wrote it flamed on all the comp.linux news groups (like the problem with
Linux Satan binaries).

Convincing computer security folks that it is secure is another matter.  They don't
have a company they can point to and blame if there is a problem.  Since a lot 
of development is done overseas, there is no control (unlike SCO).

Donald, I saw your talk at DECUS - great talk, very interesting....
--
Wade Hampton <tasi029@tmn.com>