On 26/02/12 20:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Well thats uyouir knowelege limits and I have mine.
I know.
Let's say that if anyone has broken in they have left no trace and
altered nothing. Or I would *know*. Which makes it 'not compromised'
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Hint: there is no such thing as an undetectable change.
I'd like to see evidence for that assertion. I think it's probably true
but it's not relevant here because the issue at hand isn't undetectable
change, but undetected change. The two are different.
--
Bernard Peek