"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I think that we can all accept that there are currently a variety of > > security holes in the Hurd. The type of security holes which would be > > introduced by using bad random data, however, is far worse as it has > > the potential to allow an attacker to obtain access to systems that > > are ssh'ed to from the Hurd. > > Really? So you think that using telnet to get to those systems will > be more secure? > > More secure in the sense that the user knows that it has no security, > which the user does not know if she uses Open SSH + crappy random > bits.
This is, as I already have said multiple times, an excellent reason for full and clear documentation. It is not a reason for excluding the program.
