[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Peter Lairo wrote:
>
>>>>PPS. What is important is that the *SPYWARE-ENABLING CODE* should be
>>>>removed from Mozilla.
>>>>See bug: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71270
>>>>
>>>That's what's known as "scare mungering". For your information, this
>>>"SPYWARE-ENABLING" code is know as a "native widget".
>>>
>>> EVERY SINGLE APPLICATION ON YOUR ENTIRE SYSTEM DOES THIS.
>>>
>>So what? THIS one is *designed to reveal the visited URLs*, that is
>>what makes THIS one a danger to everyone's privacy (one slice at a
>>time).
>>
>Oh no! Ring the alarm bells! The user can install a piece of software on
>his computer which would allow other companies to monitor him with his
>knowledge and approval! Terrible! Whatever shall we do!
>
It is so easy nowadays to accidentally install software (e.g., user
ignorance, viri, piggyback software, Micro$oft) that ANY such program
could access the URL list in Mozilla (correct me if I'm wrong) - not
just MediaMatrix.
There are so many possibilities for unscrupulous "companies" to access
this database (untrue?) of personal information without properly
informing the user.
When online privacy is so important, and so easily lost; why make it
even easier to violate peoples basic right to it?
>You do realise that HTTP is an insecure protocol, right?
>
Yes, I do. But two wrongs do not make a right.
>And that EVERY time you visit a website (yes this includes all the porn sites you go
>to)
>
Oh No! Really? (format C:) ;)
>that EVERY COMPUTER between you and the remote server knows EXACTLY what
>URL you visited? Including any passwords you sent?
>
At least it's limited to that session and those servers, not my entire
URL list being sent to one (or more) "companies" (and then maybe sold to
who knows else).
>And your birthdate?
>
Oh my god, that takes the cake (pun intended)! ;)
>All this hook does is emulate a native widget so that third party
>applications installed BY THE USER, such as an FTP client, can monitor
>what web sites you visit. If you are worried by this, why not be worried
>that, say, Windows IE uses native widgets for their SSL password dialog?
>
Im AM worried about other privacy violations too (alöso M$ IE). Again,
two wrongs do not make a right.
We should seriously consider the following question:
What benefit do we have from providing this information - at this
potential cost?
--
Regards,
Peter Lairo
