6 ms·

What would you recommend instead?

• baobun 11mo ago
  For security-critical or sensitive situations, auditability should be a requirement. That implies access to source code and capabilty to build it. Decisions like these need to be done from first principles. SharePoint shouldn't even have been a contender here if looked at seriously. Do your own homework.
  • LoganDark 11mo ago
    Doesn't Microsoft have government programs that grant source code access for products like Windows and (probably) SharePoint?
  • Havoc 11mo ago
    Think you answered just about everything except the question asked
    • rcbdev 11mo ago
      I think this guy wants OpenBSD running on a POWER-based Mainframe at every governmental organization.
      • saltcured 11mo ago
        Well, if you can't manage text emails with BSD mailx from the CLI, you probably shouldn't be working on nuclear weapons in the first place...
  • mmooss 11mo ago
    > For security-critical or sensitive situations, auditability should be a requirement. That implies access to source code and capabilty to build it. Vendors can be accountable without providing source code, for example through contracts specifying performance. I don't know how large Sharepoint's source is, though it has many components and I assume there is quite a bit of code. Auditing the source code of something like Microsoft Office seems almost impossible. > first principles. What does that mean in this context?