This is obviously a "great truth" - a statement whose opposite is also true. Regards and Best Wishes Marshall Eubanks On Tuesday, December 24, 2002, at 03:31 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:26:09 EST, Richard Forno said:
In my last post when I said this:
If something's deemed 'critical' to a large segment of the population, then security must NEVER outweigh conveinience. Period. Non-negotiable. I meant to say that security must ALWAYS outweigh convienience.
My goof....guess I had too much NOG and not enough NAN at the party last night. :)
A case could be made that you had it right the first time, in that a "large segment" of the population cares less about security than they do about dancing hamsters, and that they'd designate the latter as "critical". Thus the sorry state of certain end-user software on 90% of the desktops.
Happy Holidays! ;) <mime-attachment>