On 14 Jan 2011 02:25:35 -0000, Kulin Remailer wrote:
> In article <KU4J5G3540557.email@example.com>
> Kulin Remailer <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I know you're asking Zax, but here's my opinion.
>> I'm sure Omnimix is fine. Fine like there are no purposeful
>> backdoors or security reducing bugs. I'm confident that Danner's
>> intentions are above reproach. Download it and try it out, you may
>> like it.
>> However, it's a complicated shitpile of software design.
>> Complexity is the enemy of security. You may find that if you use
>> it you'll always be wondering if *you* have ****ed something up
>> which will compromise you because you may be unsure of what Omnimix
>> has configured or what Omnimix has asked you to configure. It's
>> really bizarre.
> I have to say, you've stated a real problem here. Who else, in entire
> the software world, ever attempted to put hundreds and hundreds of
> options into a single dialog style window? No menu, nothing.
> I don't accuse Danner of intentional subversion. I think, like you,
> his intentions are good enough. However, you've mentioned the
> incredibly poor design and that is true.
point: Software coders tend to make lousy designers. Two entirely
ŽIf you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of
men, I will find something in them which will hang him.¡ ~Cardinal