RE: DB2UDB hack

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Elvis Budimlic
>
> Gentlemen, to put this thread to bed, let's just remember that i5/OS is
> written by humans and by definition cannot be infallible.
>
> If you search IBM support site for "Integrity problem" you'll find 1000s
> of
> PTFs, so one could say it's documented depending on one's definition of
> the
> word documented (remember Clinton's legal defense).
>
> Just because I can't do it, it doesn't mean it is not doable.
>
> It's MUCH easier on Windows, but so what.
>
> Let's move on...


NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!

I will NOT let that slide!  Although in the interests of the list, I will
make this my last remark.

The point is that Windows IS more vulnerable than i5/OS.  Much more
vulnerable, in many more ways.  And anybody who says different is doing a
disservice to anyone that listens to them.  And those of you who are saying
to yourself, "Yeah, we know, Joe, so let it slide" are missing the point:
we've got someone who is ostensibly an i5/OS security expert saying in so
many words that Windows is as secure as i5/OS. 

Unfortunately, if the average person hears VHS enough times they'll stop
buying Betamax.  Windows is cheaper, there are more Windows programmers, and
Windows has a nifty GUI.  All true.  But Windows is far inferior to i5/OS
when it comes to security, and if a "leading expert" of i5/OS technology
says Windows is as good as i5/OS, then I'm going to scream until I'm blue in
the face that he's wrong.

Because he is.

Joe