DFS wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> Windows will never be secure.
>
> Nor will Linux.
>
>
>>> What's particularly dumb about this is that the NSA has already bee
>>> involved in the development of SELinux, the kernel of which is now
>>> part of most Linux distributions.
>
> You must mean the NSA built more back doors in the SELinux kernel than
> they did in Windows</linux_user_idiocy>
>
You can easily verify that... just download the source and have a look.
Shame you can't for windows... You have to TRUST microsoft to do the right
thing...
>>> It's already been rated at a
>>> higher level in their "Trusted Computer Systems Evaluation Criteria"
>>> (the "orange book") than any version of Windows has.
>
> Where's the beef? You won't mind if we don't take the word of a biased
> Linux dweeb, of course.
>
>
Then don't... do the research for yourself...
>>> Frankly, I don't get what the justification for trying to get a
>>> secure version of Windows is.
>
> That's because you're a moron with no real-world experience. The branches
> of the military have hundreds of Windows apps in use by nearly 1.5 million
> users.
>
And declining every day...
>>> They should just dump it and use one
>>> of the SELinux-based systems.
>
> Yeah right. Look what happens when Munich Germany tries to replace 14000
> Windows seats - it takes them 8-10 years and costs them $3,500 per seat,
> and they still can't get rid of Windows.
>
Windows... at best, a good example of how to do something the wrong way...
--
*****************************************************************************
From the desk of:
Jerome D. McBride
20:06:53 up 4 days, 1:34, 3 users, load average: 1.25, 1.07, 0.56
*****************************************************************************
|
|
