__/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Wednesday 09 August 2006 20:00 \__
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote
> on Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:19:27 +0100
> <1355414.jPghrmSmHn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> The Open Source Debate Continues
>>
>> ,----[ Closing remark ]
>> | With all of the vulnerabilities in proprietary or "closed source"
>> | software, that statement may be a bit off the mark, but the perception
>> | is there. There's little doubt open source will continue to change the
>> | way IT buys and manages technology, but this hot-button issue needs to
>> | be added to the conversation with other transformational factors like
>> | software as a service (SaaS), virtualization, and software oriented
>> | architecture (SOA).
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.networkcmdb.com/2006/08/08/the-open-source-debate-continues/
>
> I would also hope vulnerabilities are a factor in TCO as well.
> How they'd be properly calculated, I for one don't know, especially
> if a piece of malware lodges into a corporation's infrastructure
> and then simply sits there, doing no further damage apart from
> capturing the occasional keystroke. The system's compromised,
> but still up.
True. But the should always be assumed to have been exposed. This is a risk
factor.
http://news.com.com/University+server+in+hackers+hands+for+a+year/2100-7349_3-6074739.html
University server in hackers' hands for a year
It's like those teenagers that stole the veterans' data in Virginia. And
while I don't know about TCO figures, I know that the staff here spends a
lot of time scanning, and protecting (for which one needs licence), and
cleaning up a mess (sometimes needs hosing and reinstalling).
|
|
