[Info-vax] Keeping OpenVMS update-to-date
Simon Clubley
clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Fri Oct 2 08:25:41 EDT 2020
On 2020-10-01, Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy at gfsys.co.uk> wrote:
>
> ne would assume that with such a claim, there would be supporting
> documentation that describes the relevant tests and approvals, so
> is there ?. It will need to be related to the current release, not
> some 20 year old Vax or Alpha approvals It's a steep mountain to
> climb, but essential if such claims are to have a base in reality.
No such documentation exists that I am aware of.
As far as I can tell, VSI seem to be comparing CVE counts for an old
and now obscure operating system (VMS) that is probed probably once
in a blue moon with CVE counts for operating systems that are probed
every day by an army of highly capable researchers and then claiming
that VMS is more secure as a result.
If anyone else knows of another reason why VSI are claiming VMS is the
most secure operating system on the planet then I invite you to reveal
that reason.
> Bug reporting system need s to be there as well, as that fosters trust,
> especially if accompanied by transparent and timely remedy.
>
My own experiences indicate that VSI do not seem to understand this.
I should also point out that this appears to be a VSI _management_
problem and NOT a VSI engineers problem. My problem is with the VSI
management, NOT the VSI engineers.
> Let's drop the marketdroid speak and concentrate on the engineering...
>
I agree. VSI clearly have a different outlook on this however. :-(
Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.
More information about the Info-vax
mailing list