RE: [Full-Disclosure] Web sites compromised by IIS attack

[Denis Dimick <denis@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Stuart,

First off. Don't think I ever have been to support.m$.com don't think they 
have anything I'd ever want. Since I only use M$ for it's proper use, to 
play games, why would I care about support. Any REAL work I want to do is 
done under some flavor of Unix.

As oon as someone gets CoD running under Linux, I'll go back to a single 
boot system.

Denis

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, Stuart Fox (DSL AK) wrote:

> > 
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > If I'm understanding you correctly you don't understand 
> > Linux/Redhat. Or your just being silly to make a point. 
> > sendmail, wftp , php, etc.. are not owned by Redhat. Each of 
> > these applications are owned buy someone else and Redhat is 
> > allowed to re-distribute them. 
> 
> Yeah, but Redhat are the vendor, whether or not they actually wrote the
> software, they distributed it to you.  Their product is Redhat Linux
> (the distribution), if that has a flaw in it they shouldn't get exempted
> just because they didn't write it.  Could Microsoft then pass off
> support for ftp.exe for instance?
> 
> > 
> > And using the number of fixes/patches to an application as an 
> > indication of how god it is, is a bad thing. Using this logic 
> > you would have to say M$ is a good product.
> 
> I believe you haven't looked at http://support.microsoft.com for a
> while?
> 
> And besides, it was pretty clear that he wasn't using it as an
> indication of relative quality, just as an indicator of the fact that
> noone writes perfect software.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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