Acceptable Losses (was Re: Whoops! (re: WH network monitoring plan response))
sean at donelan.com
Tue Dec 24 21:16:59 UTC 2002
On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Richard Forno wrote:
> In my last post when I said this:
> > If something's deemed 'critical' to a large segment of the population, then
> > security must NEVER outweigh conveinience. Period. Non-negotiable.
> I meant to say that security must ALWAYS outweigh convienience.
Sigh, people are playing games with words to force false choices. Of
course its negotiable because the act of defining something "critical"
is a negotiation.
More information about the NANOG