You must have made that assumption if you believe that the Law of Large Numbers applies.
Tell that to the US Army and the US Govt, they were well aware of my past and seem to have no problem with it.
Somehow I don't think they let you work in information security. I know that the organization that I work for wouldn't hire someone with your background.
Seeing as I never was convicted of a crime, just banned from usage in the school system for 6 years and at home via my parents, I fail to make the connection. I mean is Bush a criminal to you? He commited the crime of DUI, so according to you then in fact he is a criminal and therefore not capable of weighing in on certain subjects. Thats a terrible conclusion you come to and it shows us your narrow mind.
Please go look up "straw-man argument" and then reflect on the concept that using it is not a valid argument.
And by the way, it's not about whether or not you are convicted, it's whether or not you committed the crime.
I have yet to question Mozillas security, yet you continue to think I have or say I have.
Let's reflect, shall we?
Post 13: Sorry but the fact remains that if Mozilla was the number one software we would all be bitching about security problems, popups and other annoyances. Not to mention since Mozilla is open source, its hard not to argue that since the coding is open that it is easier to crack and infect. So tell me again why its safer other than it has fewer users?
Post 26: Firefox was the number one browser with 95% of the market would it or would it not have as many issues as IE when it comes to ceratain security problems ie; pop-ups, spy-ware,mal-ware,hijack-ware?
You were saying?
Although what can be created by man can be destroyed by man,...
Agreed.
...even with open sourcing which allows a more fluid ability to correct secuirty problems you still will have problems,...
True, just fewer of them.
I have a sensation that you believe that open sourcing is to you the end all be all of code.
Nope. But I'd rather see Open Source used unless a good technical or business argument be made against it. Open Source, like open government, allows users to have some control of what's going on. Even a user that has no coding experience could hire someone to audit open code, something that is not allowed under closed source licenses.
Here's an essay (with a bevy of links) as to why.
Call this assuming things. But I am going to assume that many people, not all,or even most, but many, people in the information security business got started with childhood curiosity. Probably much like mine, even fewer but I guarantee they exist even go so far as to test site security on there own through illegal means, the only difference between them and me is I actually admitted it and got caught, although unless you are looking through school records in 1986 you wouldnt find it.You also would not find a history of similar behavior, no thievery nothing to the negative a simple childhood mistake that unless someone dug deep enough would not find
I cant go into exactly all of my job details in the military, but I will tell you this I had more than fair access to classified documents and programs and my actual first PMOS even put me in charge of data collection of certain aspects, of which I am still obliged not to release until they become public.
I have yet to question Mozillas security, yet you continue to think I have or say I have. Let's reflect, shall we? Post 13: Sorry but the fact remains that if Mozilla was the number one software we would all be bitching about security problems, popups and other annoyances. Not to mention since Mozilla is open source, its hard not to argue that since the coding is open that it is easier to crack and infect. So tell me again why its safer other than it has fewer users? Post 26: Firefox was the number one browser with 95% of the market would it or would it not have as many issues as IE when it comes to ceratain security problems ie; pop-ups, spy-ware,mal-ware,hijack-ware? You were saying?
You are assuming that I was implying that I was questioning Mozillas security. Other than bad spelling I am not guilty of implying that to which you are assuming. If you read and used comprehension of the totallity of the posts it all comes back to my original assumption that if it was reversed and FireFox was numero uno, we would be discussing its security problems, not whether or not its less secure than IE or more secure than IE, other than me questioning open source itself, which is the only instance I directly questioned the security of Firefox(and it was more of a question, and a side argument).
Here is a good argument from a pro-open source site
dwheeler
Here is another from big blue itself:
ibm
SO I personally believe there is a good argument on the ground s that open source is more secure or not, but the overall thrust of my argument really hasnt been that at all.