<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/04/2015 21:21, Ben Laurie wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAG5KPzxH+36m88N+cES5uo7xiecYAdsUdBXvuZXwpa0Pfzr_Lg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">On 11 April 2015 at 19:50, Bill Frantz <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:frantz@pwpconsult.com" target="_blank">frantz@pwpconsult.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Newer does not necessarily mean better,<br>
especially in the security field, and in fact
something that has stood<br>
the test of time may actually be _better_ than
something entirely<br>
newfangled.<br>
</blockquote>
</span></blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Wat? This is crazy talk.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Clearly the only sane policy is to believe that the
latest version of X is the most secure. And if you know
about X you ought to also know about the problems with
X-1, X-2,.... So, sure, each end indicates which versions
it is prepared to use, but of the intersection, _surely_
highest wins?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Well, not totally crazy, just maybe tricky. Case in point, later
generations of Skype since about 2009 have decreased security &
privacy by sharing with Redmond and Maryland. But the counter to
that is that the sane mass-user policy is still to accept the
version upgrades, until the point of abandoning the product.<br>
<br>
iang<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>