From: "Robert Comer" 

>I don't think that's
> any better than "safely betting" that MS has done good job
in fixing one
of
> their problems. I either have a closed source vendor's word, or a bunch of
> open source programmer's words to rely on.

Aye, but if you really want to know if it's fixed, at least with the source
you can check it yourself.

- Bob Comer



"Antti Kurenniemi"  wrote in
message news:3de88cef{at}w3.nls.net...
> "Tony Williams"  wrote in message
> news:3DE7AAB4.7010606{at}blarg.net...
> > That's where the open source peer-review comes into play. If I
> > publish a fix for a security exploit you can safely bet that it's going
> > to be  widely scrutinised. As opposed to a closed source fix
> > where you're back  to having only the vendor's word to rely on.
>
> Did you notice that you used the words "safely bet"? I don't
think that's
> any better than "safely betting" that MS has done good job
in fixing one
of
> their problems. I either have a closed source vendor's word, or a bunch of
> open source programmer's words to rely on.
>
>
> Antti Kurenniemi
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4