> Are you arguing that since we can't replace everything with safe code, we shouldn't replace most of it? Well, yes, the effort to replace even a small part of

> Are you arguing that since we can't replace everything with safe code, we shouldn't replace most of it? Well, yes, the effort to replace even a small part of current code base with something perceived as "safe code" is huge. The re-factoring effort is so great that there is no doubt a significant number of new seurity problems wouldn't be created. They would of course be different kind of problems. Not indexing errors, perhaps, but something we don't even know about. And justifiying this very large cost is not so easy.