Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
On the security of our processes and infrastructureOn the security of our processes and infrastructurePosted Sep 19, 2011 12:31 UTC (Mon) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784)In reply to: On the security of our processes and infrastructure by malor Parent article: On the security of our processes and infrastructure
I certainly know that at this point, if I were the maintainer of an OS kernel I would flag all fixes to the kernel as security fixes, simply because (a) selectively flagging fixes is subject to human error (b) there are too many people out there who can't be trusted to know the difference between "A implies B" and "not-A implies not-B". (In this case, A is "the fix is flagged as a security fix" and B is "omitting the fix has negative implications for the security of the system".) Out of interest, what OS would you trust to keep such information safe? (For my part, I think the right solution there is to keep the information strongly encrypted, and never let the keys reside - even in volatile storage - on a network-connected device.)
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||