On 2007-02-15, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
> Make vendors liable for bad code says expert
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| When U.S. courts ruled more than a decade ago that consumers weren't
>| liable for fraudulent use of their credit card numbers after the
>| first US$50, credit card companies -- which were left holding the
>| huge bill -- took notice and dove into fighting fraud and losses.
>|
>| That's the same approach needed now in the software industry to
>| help drastically improve IT security, according to Bruce Schneier,
>| a security expert, author and CTO of U.S.-based enterprise security
>| vendor BT Counterpane.
> `----
>
> http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php?id=2064310434&rid=-50
>
>
> Related:
>
>=== Begin quote ==
>
> "The cost of these steps could reduce our operating margins. Despite
> these efforts, actual or perceived security vulnerabilities in our
> products could lead some customers to seek to return products, to reduce
> or delay future purchases, or to use competing products. Customers may
> also increase their expenditures on protecting their existing computer
> systems from attack, which could delay adoption of new technologies. Any
> of these actions by customers could adversely affect our revenue. In
> addition, actual or perceived vulnerabilities may lead to claims against
> us. While our license agreements typically contain provisions that
> eliminate or limit our exposure to such liability, there is no assurance
> these provisions will be held effective under applicable laws and
> judicial decisions."
>
> Ah, from the horse's mouth: Microsoft just might be held legally responsible
> for selling software that is insecure.
>
>== End quote ==
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061122235224396
C'mon, Erik. I'm surprised you aren't spinning this already.
--
If your OS needs a virus scanner, RUN!!
|
|
