[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: Re: Bug? FSFS revision control

From: HAND,Nathan <Nathan.HAND_at_dewr.gov.au>
Date: 2005-01-27 00:15:02 CET

Sean Laurent [mailto:sean@neuronfarm.com] wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 January 2005 03:37 pm, Dassi, Nasser wrote:
> > There are several ways; and giving up so easily is extremely *bad*
> > practice. Making a hacker think a few minutes is better than just
> > giving them the answer without a blink.
> 1) The best way to do that is to secure the server itself.
> 2) Security through obfuscation does not work.

I disagree. Security through obscurity does work. It is part of the
principle of defence in depth. It should not be used as the sole layer
of security. The correct thinking is "security through obscurity is not

A common example of security through obscurity is to change the default
listening port of SSH. That alone is not sufficient to secure the box,
but it does enhance the overall security of the box.

The information contained in this e-mail message and any attached files may
be confidential information, and may also be the subject of legal
professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient any use,
disclosure or copying of this e-mail is unauthorised. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail
and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 27 00:17:15 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.