Re: Nomination question: Redhat
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> writes:
> > You fail, once again, to even vaguely grasp the point. Auditing
> > is a _good_ thing, whether it's done by one ``kernel hacker'' or a
> > team of people (OpenBSD). We don't do it; Redhat does. And,
> > BTW,m dismissing Alan Cox as nothing more than ``a kernel hacker''
> > is the most crass thing I've ever seen you do.
>
> I'm not about to bow down and worship Alan Cox, Linus Torvalds, Eric
> Raymond, Richard Stallman, Bruce Perens, the Pope, you, my
> neighbors, or anyone else for that matter. The way your argument
> looks to me is "they have Alan Cox and we don't so they must have a
> better security tean."
Well, you need to look at things better then. My argument is that:
Red Hat are auditing code, Red Hat has Alan Cox auditing code, Red Hat
(in general) responds faster than us to security alerts etc., as a
result of _all three_ of these things, I conclude they are doing
security better than us.
It'd be nice if you respond to what I've written, rather than making
things up and responding to that instead.
> As for Alan being more than a kernel hacker, what more is he?
*blink*, are you trolling? Either way, I'm fairly sure I don't want
to carry on this conversation. I'll come back when you've found me
lots of people who are as skilled as Alan and who have done as much
for the Linux community as Alan has.
--
James
Reply to: