On Thu, 13 May 2004 10:20:40 PDT, Randal L. Schwartz said:
> This is what irks me about Microsoft. It's irresponsible.
No. It's being *very* responsible.
Doing security right is very complicated and expensive. Blowing it off and
patching holes as they're found is a lot cheaper. And they don't have any
obligation to you, the customer - their obligation is to improve the bottom
line.
I am willing to suspect that if a C-level exec at Microsoft suggested that they
spend more money on security without any business case ("We'll lose market
share to Linux" or similar) to back it up, they could find themselves the
target of a shareholder suit alleging fiduciary irresponsibility.
Attachment:
pgp00076.pgp
Description: PGP signature