* Tom Shelton peremptorily fired off this memo:
> On 2008-03-26, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> ____/ Richard Rasker on Wednesday 26 March 2008 16:31 : \____
>>
>>> What do you do if you find an exploitable flaw in your code? Well, nothing,
>>> of course -- at least if you're Microsoft:
>>>
>> http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/03/26/jet_database_engine_security_flaws/
>>>
>>> Apparently, Microsoft "thought it had blocked the attack vectors."
>>> Incompetent idiots.
>>
>> Just don't bet your next elections on Microsoft's negleigence.
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| Problems found in an audit of Diebold tabulation records from an Ohio
>>| November 2006 election raise questions about whether the database got
>>| corrupted during the tabulation of election results...
>>|
>>| The database is built from Microsoft's Jet database engine. The
>>| engine, according to Microsoft, is vulnerable to corruption when a lot
>>| of concurrent activity is happening with the database, such as what
>>| occurs on an election night [and Microsoft advises againt using Jet in
>>| a complex environment]...
>> `----
>>
>> http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/04/diebold_vote_da.html
>
> I think that is more a wrong tool for the job sort of thing. I mean,
> who uses a Jet database for something that intense? Yikes....
Hmmmmm. Does DFS work for Diebold?
Sounds like ol' Billy has the same attitude about money!
--
If something's expensive to develop, and somebody's not going to get paid,
it won't get developed. So you decide: Do you want software to be
written, or not?
-- Bill Gates
|
|