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" Newsgroups: comp.lang.php Subject: Re: Lilupophilupop Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2012 18:52:00 +0100 Lines: 24 Message-ID: <9mrf20Fm65U1@mid.individual.net> References: <9mqrbsFs13U1@mid.uni-berlin.de> 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: Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.php:4264 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