RE: [cobalt-users] Cobalt to provide compensation for server hack ?

[<rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> If GM suddenly told people who had a car stolen that they're
> sorry they made the locks out of aluminum foil, but if you had
> learned about automotive repair you would have seen this and
> installed the publicly available higher quality locks that the
> other automotive experts were using this wouldn't
> have happened, they'd be in court every day.

You're assuming the following untrue things:

* Other manufacturers use better nameservers. False: most use BIND as
well.

* Cobalt used a much weaker and obviously defective version of a lock.
Partially false: on most Cobalt systems the BIND version is relatively
recent if not the latest. Still, it's not the same as a lock made out of
aluminum foil.

* Other manufacturers don't require you to know anything about your
locks either. Ha!

* Other companies don't require maintenance on locks. False: anyone who
uses BIND needs to upgrade and check and secure it.

If not many people owned cars, and most of those were highly qualified
mechanics, and every other car manufacturer used locks made by the same
lock manufacturer, and everyone who currently owned cars had to check,
inspect, lubricate, and replace their locks on a monthly basis since the
locks were susceptible to being hacked by new keys every month...

...then if GM started selling cars to people who weren't mechanics
already, then that's a better analogy.

Let's be careful making comparisons when those comparisons don't apply.
Of course GM would be in court every day under that scenario; it's just
that this scenario is *not* directly comparable to what's going on here.

--
Rodolfo J. Paiz
rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>