[TriLUG] Green Hills calls Linux 'insecure' for defense

[Mike M]

On Mon, Apr 12, 2004 at 06:54:20PM -0400, Rick DeNatale wrote:
> This is not at all an argument against open source, just a more
> sophisticated view of the role of source in security auditing.

Requesting more clarity here please.  I can't tell what is open or
closed in your description: the compiler source, the source the compiler
is compiling, or both, or neither.

It sounds like you're describing an obscure snd dastardly security hole.  
I accept that such things are possible.  My gosh, look at what crackers
go through to do their evil. My trust 
goes to the source that the entire world can peruse.  If it's evil it 
will be found - at least that is what my trust is based on.  That and
MD5.
-- 
Mike

Moving forward in pushing back the envelope of the corporate paradigm.