Re: Lilupophilupop

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From	"J.O. Aho" <user@example.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.php
Subject	Re: Lilupophilupop
Date	Sat, 07 Jan 2012 18:52:00 +0100
Lines	24
Message-ID	<9mrf20Fm65U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<9mqrbsFs13U1@mid.uni-berlin.de> <je9ghb$bvv$1@dont-email.me> <je9v9o$hit$1@news.albasani.net>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Trace	individual.net xDKEzY6/78tWf1GTUoiHiAt45AHxdnVck5vIw1B5p93tebJWQQ
Cancel-Lock	sha1:KM8n//eDpXbprgw3k7gWCKOv5a0=
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0.1) Gecko/20111226 Firefox/9.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.6.1
In-Reply-To	<je9v9o$hit$1@news.albasani.net>
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.php:4264

Show key headers only | View raw

Thomas Mlynarczyk wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle schrieb:

>> Nothing new here - it just shows there are a lot of programmers out there
>> unconcerned with security.
>
> Indeed. But I don't understand why this is so. After all, we're not talking
> about the personal homepage of some newbie showing pictures of his dog and
> favourite cookie recipes. The problem exists also (if not especially) with
> real big professional sites, even sites where security is paramount (online
> banking), run by people who should have more than enough money to pay
> competent, security-aware programmers to do the job properly. I just don't get
> it.

The big issue is "maximize profit" and "finish on half the required time", 
when you have those two things as the main mantras, then everything will be 
crap, not just web sites and their security, but things like cell phones which 
won't hold more than max 3 years, crappy health care and insurances which 
don't cover anything at all.

-- 

   //Aho

Thread

Lilupophilupop "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-07 13:15 +0100
  Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-07 08:15 -0500
    Re: Lilupophilupop Thomas Mlynarczyk <thomas@mlynarczyk-webdesign.de> - 2012-01-07 18:27 +0100
      Re: Lilupophilupop "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2012-01-07 18:52 +0100
        Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-07 16:02 -0500
      Re: Lilupophilupop "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2012-01-10 18:31 -0600
        Re: Lilupophilupop "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-11 09:29 +0100
          Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-11 08:42 -0500
          Re: Lilupophilupop Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2012-01-11 15:23 +0100
  Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-07 14:28 +0100
    Re: Lilupophilupop "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-07 16:13 +0100
      Re: Lilupophilupop Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-07 18:03 +0100
      Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-07 20:34 +0100
        Re: Lilupophilupop "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-08 14:53 +0100
          Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-08 15:27 +0100
            Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-08 10:00 -0500
              Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-08 18:29 +0100
                Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-08 15:49 -0500
                Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-08 22:59 +0100
                Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-08 17:38 -0500

csiph-web