Security is not a state. It is a practise. <br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 4/6/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Bruce Ediger</b> <<a href="mailto:eballen1@qwest.net">eballen1@qwest.net</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Fri, 6 Apr 2007 <a href="mailto:neal.krawetz@mac.hush.com">neal.krawetz@mac.hush.com</a> wrote:<br><br> ...<br>> moderate risk) environments, you need to remember: security is a<br>> measurement of risk. If the threat is low enough, then WEP should
<br>> be fine.<br> ...<br><br>Wait just a minute. Do you propose to say that "security" is an economic<br>good, with associated opportunity costs and benefits? But just the other<br>day, all the anti-virus vendors and trade rags in the world seemed to
<br>say that "security" was binary, and "on" is the preferred state.<br><br>What the sam scratch is going on around here? Do I have to make a tradeoff,<br>again?<br><br>_______________________________________________
<br>Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.<br>Charter: <a href="http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html">http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html</a><br>Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - <a href="http://secunia.com/">
http://secunia.com/</a><br></blockquote></div><br>