<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Blog @ Brick Street Software - Latest Comments</title><link>http://brickstreetsw.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://brickstreetsw.disqus.com/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 15:12:50 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Alternatives to Low Security ESPs</title><link>http://blog.brickstreetsoftware.com/2011/04/alternatives-to-low-security-esps/#comment-179280508</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Laura - Obviously an in-house ESP is as secure as the rest of the house.  We derive a large portion of our revenue from financial services clients, and their houses are pretty secure. Clearly more so than the average ESP.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">brickstreetsw</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 15:12:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Alternatives to Low Security ESPs</title><link>http://blog.brickstreetsoftware.com/2011/04/alternatives-to-low-security-esps/#comment-179275316</link><description>&lt;p&gt;In house email programs are also vulnerable to the same problems as the ESPs are. Just bringing things inside the company isn't going to fix the issue unless the company addresses security issues as well. And I'm quite sure that most companies don't spend even as much time or energy on security as the ESPs do.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Laura Atkins</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 15:07:16 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>