1996-10-05 - RE: WINDOWS NT ????

Header Data

From: John Fricker <jfricker@vertexgroup.com>
To: snajdr@pvt.net
Message Hash: b7dd8aa5e543826588e5e837d10ed316f326b4aa3c370ce40b08dcf4e6b7f12a
Message ID: <19961005002433046.AAA82@dev.vertexgroup.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-05 06:23:04 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 14:23:04 +0800

Raw message

From: John Fricker <jfricker@vertexgroup.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 14:23:04 +0800
To: snajdr@pvt.net
Subject: RE: WINDOWS NT ????
Message-ID: <19961005002433046.AAA82@dev.vertexgroup.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


An NT machine running off the shelf protocols and services is certainly more secure than your average linux install. Of course clueless administrators for either (any) platform can leave the door wide open easily enough. 

But what do you mean by secure?

>snow (snow@smoke.suba.com) said something about Re: WINDOWS NT ???? on or about 10/4/96 2:57 PM

>
>> pclow wrote:
>> > Adamsc wrote:
>> > > > is Windows NT secured system ?
>> > NT? Secured? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha
>>                         8-)
>> How ? 
>
>     By turning off the machine, unpluging the ethernet, moving the
>hard drive to another state...
>
>
>Petro, Christopher C.
>petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
>snow@smoke.suba.com
>End of message






Thread