[ Date Index ]
[ Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date /
thread ]
[ Next by date /
thread => ]
Re: [LUG] OT: marketing calls Pt 69!
- To: list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [LUG] OT: marketing calls Pt 69!
- From: Martijn Grooten <sweetwatergeek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:16:52 +0000
- Delivered-to: dclug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=R3gIxpULXypSpPaJQmyMjhugXFBWczDiDu94GZC5/Jw=; b=oXcuQPWul0maTvmIL5XYEE+jewMjUL2R7roAm9faHud45I6SsbaW/nP/b4sUAnvv1Q unJZrWYMCJBW60V+Ta7yvcKuqk1s33+KdauJ/hvc7qJLNQvyVOQv+XQU5UFkuRGXz9Hs SuM9ArUfPdd2qBZXZkuUJa7XETqrzddeNseSc=
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 11:40 AM, I wrote:
> Pointless security checks give security a bad name and thus give
> security a bad name.
They also give security a bad name... Erm, I don't know what I meant
to say, but they're bad, okay? :-)
Martijn.
--
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html
