[Am-info] How tenacity kept monopoly intact

[Geoffrey]

Mark Hinds wrote:
> 
> http://www.msnbc.com/news/655131.asp
> 
> >James rejects these criticisms and says
> >the decision to protect Microsoft's security
> >provisions was "one of those `duh' issues."
> >He continues: "Microsoft has security
> >protocols. Are we going to tell everyone
> >how they work? Do you want people to get
> >access to your credit-card information
> >when you shop on line?"
> 
> So this clueless idiot from the DOJ believes
> that only through obscurity can security be achieved
> when in fact security experts more or less agree that
> security by design is the only real security.
> 
> That is simply ridiculous.

As you know and most anyone with a bit of technical background knows,
the security in protocols has absolutely nothing to do with the
publishing/non-publishing of the technical aspects of said protocols.

Unfortunately, we have someone here who hasn't a clue.  Sad, really sad.

> 
> Mark
> _______________________________________________
> Am-info mailing list
> Am-info@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/am-info

--
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric@denali.atlnet.com

"...the system (Microsoft passport) carries significant risks to users
that
are not made adequately clear in the technical documentation available."
- David P. Kormann and Aviel D. Rubin, AT&T Labs - Research
- http://www.avirubin.com/passport