Item Subject: Message text
> IMHO Joe was under the impression that Isaac was saying that if SM's
> were told privately by HP, they would discuss it on HP3000-L.  Again
> IMHO, Isaac was saying HP3000-L should not be the notification means.
>
> IMNSHO HP should publicly admit a problem exists, privately disclose
> details of the problem (including proposed solutions) to customers,
> and let the customer choose what (if anything) to do.  And in my
> opinion, the solution should NOT require an MPE upgrade.  If it does,
> HP should pay for non-prime time RC support if the customer's normal
> operations would suffer doing the upgrade in prime time.
 
Interesting points Tony!!!  See my reply regarding the first paragraph...
 
Regarding the second, I'll ask the same question (or close to it) I posted to
Joe.  What will be your response to a site who has their security breeched due
to the disclosure of this information???  Secondly, how would you defend the
actions of HP providing this information, and for us demanding this
information???
 
Regards,
/isaac