[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Full-Disclosure] And how long have buffer overflows been around?
- To: full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] And how long have buffer overflows been around?
- From: Nick FitzGerald <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:25:10 +1300
Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx replied to Glenn_Everhart@xxxxxxxxxxx:
> The only problem with that theory is that VMS *had* a security design, and
> there isn't one in NT. The only design overlap there is that Microsoft got
> some of the VMS design team to come on board for Win/NT. NT got stuck with
> having to be backward-combatable with Win 3.1, and you can fill in the blanks
> from there....
Methinks you confuse "design" with "default configuration".
NT 3.1 had a reasonable security design at its core, but an OOTB
installation produced a security configuration "compatible with
Win3.x".
Regards,
Nick FitzGerald
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html