Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 14:52:08 -0600 From: Richard Wenninger <wenninger@cox-internet.com> To: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Breaking permissions on Windows 2000 (Server Edition) Message-ID: <20020208214613.5BC4114C8D@mail.westmoormfg.com> In-Reply-To: <011d01c1b0e0$a703c6d0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <1013160210.3c639912e49de@mail.broadpark.no> <20020208211159.D57DB14C8D@mail.westmoormfg.com> <011d01c1b0e0$a703c6d0$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Sounds like you haven't read as much about NT/2000 as you've read about > Multics. I assume you already know how insecure UNIX is. Security relies solely in the hands of the system administrator for any given OS. Given that, UNIX _can_ be very secure. The problem with windows is I don't trust Microsoft. Have you seen the source code for windows 2000? Do you _know_ without a doubt the integrity of the authors? Maybe there's a network "easter egg" that's not yet been disclosed. You can't be sure without seeing the code. Therefore, Open Source, in my mind, will ALWAYS be more secure, because you can verify. I trust M$'s programmers as much as I agree with their business tactics. NOT! The do make an awesome gaming platform though... they make toys. ;-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020208214613.5BC4114C8D>