<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>More secure is not totally secure</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/andrew/archive/2008/08/01/more-secure-is-not-totally-secure.aspx</link><description>My good friend Steve the team spook, has written this post about SQL Servers track record on security compared with what many people perceive is the secure database of choice, Oracle. I can only speculate as to why this is the case as I am not an Oracle</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>More secure is not totally secure | Windows 2008 Security</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/andrew/archive/2008/08/01/more-secure-is-not-totally-secure.aspx#3096663</link><pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 15:02:39 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3096663</guid><dc:creator>More secure is not totally secure | Windows 2008 Security</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;PingBack from &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://windows2008security.com/win-security/more-secure-is-not-totally-secure/"&gt;http://windows2008security.com/win-security/more-secure-is-not-totally-secure/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>