On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Stefan Esser <ste...@nopiracy.de> wrote:
> Grow up Pierre. here we go again... failed. next time.... > See you do it again. You claim I believe EMET has been created because of > Suhosin. I never said that. Although one of the lead developers of EMET > compared it himself to it. > You know some features of Suhosin are already in PHP and the HTTP response > splitting drama shows that when you break it there is a secondary layer of > defense that protects you in case you use Suhosin. I was talking about the compilation security options which are similar (in some extends) to what Suhosin does (for some features). > Pierre it is time for you to come out of the delusional state. You repeatedly > claim that everything is now superb. No, I said it is different and better than what you have experienced. And anyone active today in php.net can tell you the same. > Do you forget PHP 5.3.7 and PHP 5.3.9 both times there were security > vulnerabilities introduced right after the last RC. > This is a sign that the PHP development process is still not healthy at all. So any software having security issues at one point or another is not healthy? I consider the opposite, I am very careful when I see a software without any discovered issues for a long time, a sign of lack of activities and users. > You claim I have personal issues, while I repeatedly tell you the technical > reasons why I see it different then you. Sorry but I do not see technical issues in this thread, as in technical explanations about why one given feature is actually a good thing. I did not see any either in the past discussions. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
