On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
The idea that poor security is worse than no security is fallacious,
and not backed up by common experience.
There is a ton of evidence both in computing and outside of it which
shows that poor security can be very much worse than no security at all.
In particular stuff which makes users think they are secure but is
worthless is very dangerous indeed.
there is also pleanty of evidence that you don't have to be perfect to be
good enough.
in addition security is useually traded off for something else
(useability, administrative effort, money, etc) and depending on what's
being protected the cost that's appropriate is going to be different.
When you know that security is limited you act appropriately, when you
believe security is good but it is not you take inappropriate risks and
get badly burned.
This is very true, but the solution isn't to try and eliminate everything
other then perfect security, it's to properly document the limitations of
various options and educate people about them.
David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
