Yup, Jon is 100% right on. Gibson seems to be the "Chicken Little" of the Internet right now.

"The packets are falling!" ;)

If sysadmins could be trusted to simply do their job 99% of this would be avoidable; but, knowing human nature like I do, I know that there will be admins out there in never-never-land that will fail to do what is right (or even correct), there will be a few compromised systems, and some traffic will source from them. It is inevitable.

I pointed out the "do your job" argument months ago, and there were 2 types who listened:

Type 1: agreed, understood, and could be trusted to do the right thing.

Type 2: disagreed, hadn't a clue, and I pray, are not sysadmins.

I think Gibson feels that Windows system administrators cannot be trusted or are plainly incompetent in comparison with Linux/Unix administrators. This may be accurate on a case by case analysis, but certainly not all Windows system administrators are morons (a few, yes, but not all.)

People complain that Windows (or any MS product) doesn't follow "standards" (define how you like), but when MS impliments what for all intents and purposes *is* a standard (raw socket support) then they wave another flag--one of paranoia--yet do not when it is pointed out that Linux/Unix have had this support for years. Hypocracy or FUD, you tell me.





[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/7/6220#6220