North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Your router/switch may be less secure than you think
- From: Robert Bonomi
- Date: Wed Aug 03 11:20:01 2005
> From firstname.lastname@example.org Wed Aug 3 09:07:20 2005
> To: Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Your router/switch may be less secure than you think
> From: "Robert E.Seastrom" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 09:58:53 -0400
> Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com writes:
> > We should all be looking to the security auditing work done by
> > the OpenBSD team for an example of how systems can be
> > cleaned up, fixed, and locked down if there is a will to do so.
> Beer, unsupported assertions, and lack of rigorous audit methodology
> can be blended together to make one's code more secure?
That would seem to depend on the quality of the code _before_ the blending, no?
As well as getting the proportions in the blend "just right".
Seriously, _any_ approach "can" result in better/more secure code. It all
depends on exactly _what_ is done. Some approaches for identifying and/or
eliminating "problems" are more efficient and/or more effective than are
alternative means. This does -not- mean that those are the "only" ways to
get things done.
Now, the _liklihood_ that any given approach "willresult in better/more secure
code -- *that* is an entirely different question. :)