"Imhotep" <Imhotep@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:NFpMe.34749$dJ5.4455@tornado.tampabay.rr.com. ..
> Hairy One Kenobi wrote:
> > "Imhotep" <Imhotep@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:fzSLe.15697$Oy2.5608@tornado.tampabay.rr.com. ..

<snip>

> > Take a look at Gartner.com, or one of the mainstream IT news sites -
> > you'll soon get the idea.
>
> I have used Gartner over the years. Yes, I am very famalar with them.
> However, I am asking you to restate your point, that is what I do not
> understand.

Hmm. maybe it's a language thing? Time to quote...

"Hairy One Kenobi" <abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:h%KLe.8368$Mf6.7813@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...


> According to the analysts, it's split 50-50 between security-by-obscurity
> and security-by-peer-review (which, judging by my experience, is something
> more talked about than performed).

Now, by "50-50" I meant that it's evenly split between the two sides: that
no being open source is approximately as effecive as being open source, when
it comes to security. Thus spake the analysts.

From my own POV, I keep hearing how much better it is that people inspect
other people's code, and fix it. But I've never met anyone that did that. Or
anyone that knew someone that did that. Or anyone who had a friend who know
someone...

Hell, I contribute (at at least /have/ contributed) to OS myself - people
tend to find a bug when they are using a particular aspect.

With literally millions of downloads, how could even 0.01% (hundreds of
dedicated techies) have missed the holes in OpenSSL and the Linux kernel?
Assuming, of course, that these people actually exist, as opposed to the
couple of people involved in the development of specific aspects or
products. Or developers breaking that precise aspect of the code?

> > Pick the platform that does the job best for your particular
application.
> > I usually have a mix of Windows, virtual IBM mainframe, Linux, and
Solaris
> > at home; no RH at the moment, though - some idiot broke the installer,
so
> > that it doesn't cope with my LCD panel. Must get around to fixing that
at
> > some point...
>
> That has been fixed.

Glad to hear that. Could you point me towards the patch that fixed my
particular version...? (Cough)

H1K

P.S. Being marginally less cruel, it seemed to have been a major problem
with Gnome - even manually editing the files to match the monitor
characteristics failed to help. After a couple of months, I temporarily
stuck MSDN Windoze on there, just to be able to run Ethereal (couldn't find
my old installation CDs).