On Monday 16 Nov 2009 10:44:27 pm Mike Ramirez wrote: > > it is precisely this assumption that does not seem logical to me. But > > frankly I do not know how to counter it ;-) > > > > How is it not logical? Product A is widely used, Product B is used less. > Bad Guy A. is smart enough to realize that product A if broken can be > used to gain him more presents because more users have it. >
so if we follow your logic to the inevitable conclusion, the moment the bad guys train their weapons on django it is going to be shot as full of holes as drupal (or even phpbb). In which case why are the devels focussing so much of their time trying to make the app safe and secure? Should they not be better of lighting candles in the rain and praying that the bad guys radar doesn't function? I personally am of the opinion that constant harping on safe practices and not doing silly things like permitting code inside html (for example) will create an inherently safer app - and the bad guys will congregate elsewhere. After all bitbucket is big enough to be on their radar - and it got hosed - although I hear that was an amazon problem, not a django issue (could be wrong). -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Senior Project Officer NRC-FOSS http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=.
