mailing list archives
Re: Windows' future (reprise)
From: Michael Simpson <mikie.simpson () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 11:06:46 +0100
On 17 May 2010 21:49, lsi <stuart () cyberdelix net> wrote:
My interpretation of risk assessment tells me that if the chances of
denial-of-service due to malware flooding is small, but the potential
damage is substantial, despite the improbability, then that risk must
Then your interpretation / risk assessment may be wrong
The risk of being hit on the head by a meteorite may be small but the
potential damage is substantial, despite the improbability, so that
risk must be mitigated - live in a bunker.
The risk of dying by slipping down the stairs in the morning (~1200
people per year in UK) is small but the potential damage is
substantial - outlaw stairs
The risk of dying putting on your slippers is small (~75 people each
year in UK) but the potential damage is substantial - outlaw slippers
I run windows and i run *nix. IMHO you can mitigate the risks
associated with either to an acceptable level.
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: Windows' future (reprise) Thor (Hammer of God) (May 17)
Re: Windows' future (reprise) Cassidy MacFarlane (May 18)