Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: for-q-clinton
But someone had to write the linux part. No?

You seem to be missing something. My thing doesn't even need to exist in order for Linux passwords to be too hard to break by today's lookup tables. They already are. Your thing does need to exist for Windows to get up to the quality of current Linux passwords. And you haven't even proven it does exist.

Often when windows has an advantage Linux types will say I can customize linux to do that. Or there's an OSS project right now underway to do that, it should be ready for beta in x months.

We're talking about how it's shipped from Microsoft, or in Linux how it's shipped in common distros. Or, in this case, just to be nice, I will accept an add-on if it's available and widely used, as that would still have an impact on general Windows security.

Face it, Windows is inferior in this aspect. Is that so hard to accept, or do you love Microsoft so much?

529 posted on 08/31/2005 10:02:10 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 527 | View Replies ]


To: antiRepublicrat
I will accept an add-on if it's available and widely used

So are you trying to be obtuse? Or are you really that slow?

That's like me saying I accept the fact that with OSS you can change the code to do what you want, but only if it's widely available and won't affect anything else.

Now how silly is that statement?

531 posted on 08/31/2005 10:08:18 AM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson