Re: no movement on Critical issues; 2.16 in Oct ?

[David Kastrup]

Wols Lists <address@hidden> writes:

> On 31/07/11 17:47, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Windows 2000 (not NT-based IIRC) does not usefully employ memory
>> protection IIRC, so likely Cygwin does not add all too much on top.
>
> Windows 2000 most definitely IS NT-based. You're thinking of Windows ME,
> which is the last of the DOS7/Win9x line.

Ok.  It might have been that the security implications of uninitialized
memory have not caught up with NT/2000 development at that point of
time.  It took quite some time before Linux closed that leak, too.

-- 
David Kastrup