Re: Heartbleed (was ... Re: My fellow (Debian) Linux users ...)
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Chris Bannister
<cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 08:59:30PM -0400, shawn wilson wrote:
>> On Apr 14, 2014 11:01 AM, "Chris Bannister" <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 01:55:04AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> > > On 4/13/2014 10:03 PM, Chris Bannister wrote:
>> > > ...
>> > > > considering it is a catastrophe worse than the Y2K bug.
>> > >
>> > > This is several orders of magnitude less severe than Y2K.
>> >
>> > I read https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/04/heartbleed.html
>> > "Catastrophic" is the right word. On the scale of 1 to 10, this is an
>> > 11"
>> >
>> > So I gathered, perhaps wrongly, that in that case the Y2K bug would have
>> > to be greater than 11 on a scale of 1 to 10.
>> >
>>
>> No we're using hex based scales now. And how this works is when someone
>> tries to be stupid and rate something a 17, it rotates into being a 0.
>
> You'd be better of emailing Mr Schneier on that one.
>
You're going to blame someone else for your (quite literal) +1 on
their comment. OK :)
Reply to: