Report tells programmers to put security over creativity

TalkBack 23 of 37:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Dont know

what to think about this. While the government can 'consult on its knowledge of software security,and 'recomend - it shouldn't be the persistence of government to 'control what is programmed via its own portfolio of intellectual property.

For now the question of 'security,is an ongoing effort. Where the homeland security should rest assured is that the 'government interest wich it directly has to manage is something that will be secured according to its own specifications.

That is a gaurantee.

But where the story asserts a complimentary enuendo for dictating policy interests directly involving individual programming - this only deals again something the government can utilize form its resources as 'best practice. Since programming is again an ongoing art.

What this insinuates is pretty much anything you might adhere to in your person of participation towards 'software. Not especially 'security.

For now it is apherent that 'auto-connectiviy is a coined phrase that seems to be getting no transparency as it is a coincidence to 'person.In that 'the computer as a network''can equally insert 'IP enuendo through 'contract law on fairly innocent individuals. The positioning of 'online-offline into something ''mandatory''wich parrallels 'drm type scenarios (wich incidentally is pretty 'non-modern at the moment) only shoulders what the aquisition type results persuade using innacurate premise and criteria - as compared to 'modern cohesive performance. Wich in fact should be towards the 'person - not what the government considers adaquate. There tables will tell them there information is solid and technology is 'up,but this wouldn't be the correct position to be in. A stone institution while consumers continue to be fluid through 'information liberalisation'' another non consideration of 'person being the '''qualifying quantity in most respects.

Since nobody can actually visualize this scenario it seems like the likeliest bait and fish. Whereby some would simply enjoy staying off the beach for the weather.

Seems to try to intimidate open-source a bit. As well Im just real leary about the 'liability bit.The ever expanding universe of 'discovery becomes the emplosion in set theory no single person should be a member of. HAving no control but the 'effect of 'dumbed down 'practiced example where no such experience would be considered through the malaze of mistaken expectation.

I would expect that less of these 'hoary weirdom stories should expound any less than the person that can detail them better from the position they keep. So everyone could know so much better.

They simply have the need to listen to the simplest suggestions. Before implementing what no questions could be heard of via those that participate within the examples they explain.

RIAA is one example.The FCC is another example.There is plenty of relationships in wich 'fiction is neither a book,or a reader,and so being must be distincly defined as being so. So everybody can benifit from them as well.

For this just seems that the pointers are going 'up the down escalator. And this is the 'security specification ?


-just talking......ya know..

Posted by: ParadigmOdyssey   Posted on: 04/02/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Get top-ranked Novell support for Red Hat at 50% less Novell A simplified IT environment isn't just less complex, it's more reliable. ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now