Re: [Full-Disclosure] 1 patch for 1 vulnerabiliy for Linux and BSD? gunna try and sell us a bridge now too?

["Exibar" <exibar@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

are you kidding me?  for years and years all I've heard from *nix people is
how secure the OS is and that there aren't as many patches needed for it and
if a vuln is found a patch is released right away....

  Ex

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Sage" <jsage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Exibar" <exibar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 2:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] 1 patch for 1 vulnerabiliy for Linux and BSD?
gunna try and sell us a bridge now too?


> Nice try.
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 12:04:46PM -0400, Exibar wrote:
>
> > From: "Exibar" <exibar@xxxxxxxxxxx> To:
> > <full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <support@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject:
> > [Full-Disclosure] 1 patch for 1 vulnerabiliy for Linux and BSD? gunna
try and sell us a bridge now too?
> > Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004
> > 12:04:46 -0400
> >
> > Looks like Linux Math is just as bad as Microsoft math now huh?
> > What happened to one patch for one vulnerability?  Looks like there
> > is 5 in this one......
>
> You will *not* see Debian or anyone else trying to spin this into
> "..oh we have 'way, 'way fewer vulns than Micro$oft does so we're
> 'way, 'way better..."
>
>
> That's Micro$oft's motive, pure and simple, for releasing multiple
> patches in the fewest possible packages.
>
> Then in two months or six months some bullsh*t TCO study will say "Oh,
> look, Micro$oft has so, so few patches!!"
>
>
> feh..
>
>
> - John
> -- 
> 10 print "Home"
> 20 print "Sweet"
> 30 goto 10
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>
>

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html