[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 07/12/13 16:14, Philip Whateley wrote: > True. But to extend the argument, are you suggesting that because a > government department has access to the source code they therefore > obtained a version of MS software that did not have the security flaws, > or that they used software knowing that the backdoors existed and that > they themselves were knowingly (rather than inadvertently) in breach of > the data protection act? Unless you could actually build the program from the source how do you know that the binaries actually correspond with the source? (Or that apparently minor changes in the build process can make important changes in the resultant executable.)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq