-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Castigliola, Angelo wrote:
> There are no known remote exploits for the
> Windows 98 operating system.
This doesn't mean that W98 is secure. On Secunia's site the latest
(corrected) vulnerability is dated 20060613, less than 1 month ago, and
tomorrow someone could find a new one that won't be corrected.
> I Could not tell you how many exploits are
> out there for Internet Explorer or Outlook\Express that will allow
> someone to compromise Windows 98 but I guess very few.
You don't need 2000 vulnerability. It's enough only one exploit to
create a 70 millions PC zombi net.
> is a better solution then the open source
> solutions that are notorious for features not working with Microsoft
> rich websites (if the website\application loads at all).
Maybe you are just getting confused. One thing is security and another
one are the "features". From a *security* point of view, OSS solutions
like FF or TB, can be more secure than the counterparts IE and OE.
However, AFAIR, browser's *features* are not the main topic of this
mailing list
> Seems like the
> major computer nerds always recommend firefox for windows however if you
> use a lot of .NET web applications then firefox is a very poor solution.
Seems MS partners are recommending using IE, but if you use a lot of XUL
applications IE is really the worst solution.
But I think this is OT, here, don't you agree?
- --
Flavio Visentin
GPG Key: http://www.zipman.it/gpgkey.asc
There are only 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary, and those who don't.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEtW/9usUmHkh1cnoRAo3UAJ9qOSp1a9LLUI51pHCqjVUigm8LTwCfXcl9
dbphXjK5pTzE/dWftOkVFyY=
=LmIq
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
