On 10/26/12, Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenha...@digia.com> wrote: > this is exactly where you are simply wrong. > for the vast majority of users, downtime is a way more costly problem > than an information leak. >
True. Those people fall into the 99% category of people not practicing security. For the 1% of us that do, an information leak is worse than downtime. > > also, we are talking about qt here. no sane person would use qt in the > trusted parts of a (seriously) security-sensitive system. > So are you suggesting we remove the QSsl namespace from Qt then? You can't have it both ways. > so, can we now *please* put the matter to rest? No. I am anticipating Thiago's well formed/thought-out response [to my email 3 posts back] :-). d3fault _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
