Andrew Farris wrote:
Douglas McClendon wrote:
<rant>
I wish I could say that I'm sorry to crush your hopes, but I'm really
not. Despite what I've said in the past, I have the utmost respect
for selinux and security. But what I don't have any respect for is
people of your mind, who myopically just see "increased security".
People who view security that way IMO contribute to some of the worst
cancers against humanity.
This is just standard rhetoric that I shouldn't be wasting my time
repeating here, but security is ALWAYS a balance and a tradeoff
against other *values*, and never an absolute.
Sounds like politically charged nonsense, not rhetoric related to
computer security.
Guess you're no fan Bruce -
http://www.news.com/2010-7348-5204924.html
"
But that's only half of the equation; it's just as important to discuss
the costs. Security is always a trade-off, and herein lies the real
question: "Is this security countermeasure worth it?"
As Americans, and as citizens of the world, we need to think of
ourselves as security consumers. Just as a smart consumer looks for the
best value for his dollar, we need to do the same. Many of the
countermeasures being proposed and implemented cost billions. Others
cost in other ways: convenience, privacy, civil liberties, fundamental
freedoms, greater danger of other threats. As consumers, we need to get
the most security we can for what we spend.
"
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
