Interesting...

[Samuel ]slund]

On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 08:58:09AM -0400, Adam Pavelec wrote:
> > > The point whoever it was was trying to make is still valid.
> > > Free software is not equal to bugfree software, there might be a better
> > > chance that someone finds security holes and fixes them when the source
> > > is Free but to say that Free software has no bugs is foolishness.
> >
> > I did not say the point wasn't valid. But imho Adam didn't claim open
> > software was bugfree, either.
> 
> That's exactly right.  In fact, the main purpose for posting the link to the
> news article was to bring the attention of the vulnerability to anyone who
> might still be using the affected software.  I have noticed that many GPG
> users on this list still use older versions of PGP for compatability and/or
> testing purposes.

I (and probably the other poster to) reacted to:
--------------------------------
I am glad GnuPG is open to review by our community to aviod
these issues.
--------------------------------
wich sounds like 'Free software do not have security holes', or atleast
'that could not have happend to Us'. Neither of those are true.

That I expect better stability and less trouble from Free software is 
not the issue.

Sorry, to pick on you. Information is good. 

//Samuel