===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsrepo/anoncvs/cvs/www/Attic/press.html,v
retrieving revision 1.116
retrieving revision 1.117
diff -u -r1.116 -r1.117
--- www/Attic/press.html	2000/07/03 12:55:50	1.116
+++ www/Attic/press.html	2000/07/04 23:04:47	1.117
@@ -54,6 +54,23 @@
 <a href="ports.html">&quot;Ports&quot; collection</a>. 
 <p>
 
+<li><font color=#009000><strong><a
+href="http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2589471,00.html">Exposed
+to a Web of viruses</a>, eWeek.com, June 19, 2000
+</strong></font><br>
+
+Peter Coffee, eWeek Labs, mentions OpenBSD in an article subtitled
+"IT wanted integration; Microsoft delivered. Now both must fix lax
+security". Near the end (it's there, really), he writes:
+<i>Those who champion the open-source process point to projects
+such as the OpenBSD operating system, with its tremendous security
+record, as proof of concept. But there are other examples, such as
+loopholes in Kerberos code that went unnoticed for years, that show
+the limits of volunteer effort</i>. Once again, we note that published
+source code doesn't automatically imply a security review. It won't
+happen by itself: people have to <i>want</i> to do it.
+<p>
+
 <li><font color=#009000><strong>
 <a href="reprints/pr27.html">OpenBSD 2.7 press release</a>, June 15, 2000
 </strong></font><br>
@@ -1195,7 +1212,7 @@
 <hr>
 <a href="index.html"><img height=24 width=24 src=back.gif border=0 alt=OpenBSD></a> 
 <a href=mailto:www@openbsd.org>www@openbsd.org</a>
-<br><small>$OpenBSD: press.html,v 1.116 2000/07/03 12:55:50 louis Exp $</small>
+<br><small>$OpenBSD: press.html,v 1.117 2000/07/04 23:04:47 louis Exp $</small>
 
 </body>
 </html>