Hello, joe!
Anyway, you can specify an unlimited amount of non-proxied servers in
autoconfiguration script. More, you may modify autoconfig rules as
frequently as needed, or even do it automatically.
Agreed. But if the idea is to protect your internal clients from your
intranet web servers, the p
> >> Nice ...fresh from the oven too. This, if it works, should be a
> >> 'extremely critical' update from Ms.
> >
> > Wouldn't such a tool be of limited utility, given that the
> unpriviliged
> > application's windows are on the same desktop as, and can
> therefore send
> > messages to, window
> >>Wouldn't such a tool be of limited utility, given that the
> unpriviliged
> >>application's windows are on the same desktop as, and can
> therefore send
> >>messages to, windows belonging to priviliged applications?
> >>
> >>
> Correct.
> Damn no ways out, this is flawed.
> Is that new ?
- Original Message -
From: "Phillip R. Paradis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'devis'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 6:51 PM
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>&
Hi,
> Agreed. But if the idea is to protect your internal clients from your
> intranet web servers, the proxy isn't doing much for you. Plus again,
> someone can just configure their machine to not use the proxy as mentioned
> previously. If the machines are available on the public intranet without
To: joe; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
Hello, joe!
>>Autoconfig script may enumerate hosts which don't require a proxy.
>>Usually there are a very few intranet servers in corporate network.
> You should have prefixed "there
Phillip R. Paradis wrote:
Wouldn't such a tool be of limited utility, given that the unpriviliged
application's windows are on the same desktop as, and can therefore send
messages to, windows belonging to priviliged applications?
Correct.
Damn no ways out, this is flawed.
Is that new ? No.
___
> Nice ...fresh from the oven too. This, if it works, should be a
> 'extremely critical' update from Ms.
Wouldn't such a tool be of limited utility, given that the unpriviliged
application's windows are on the same desktop as, and can therefore send
messages to, windows belonging to priviliged ap
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Interesting tool to downsize rights when logged on as Administrator
>
>(Link may wrap)
>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/security/securecode/columns/default.aspx?p
>ull=/library/en-us/dncode/html/secure11152004.asp
My favourite part is the sample directory used by Microsoft:
Excuse me, but i won't join and rejoice. Until, as i have posted on this
list elsewhere, this item makes it further than the obscure devel / kb
article but gets actually pulled as a critical security update and the
'linking/shortcut' procedure automatised for key components /
applications in th
EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of devis
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 6:45 PM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/security/securecode/columns/default.aspx?p
>ull=/library/en-us/dncode/ht
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Interesting tool to downsize rights when logged on as Administrator
(Link may wrap)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/security/securecode/columns/default.aspx?p
ull=/library/en-us/dncode/html/secure11152004.asp
Nice ...fresh from the
> either use sudo or su to do work as root, but Windows doesn't
> make users
> the admin by default *either*, unless you setup Fast User Switching
> *during* the install.
Windows XP doesn't allow that to be selected during installation. It is
activated or not based on available system memory du
True goal is making as much money and influence as possible.
Please read my previous posts on this list regarding that matter.
This is why, Firefox being independant from this OS that carries 60
of its code base as being legacy code for older system hardware and
The Mozilla Suite (and Firefox)
ROTECTED] On Behalf Of devis
> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 12:11 AM
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> Todd Towles wrote:
>
> >Windows doesn't tell you about the Admin account and makes
> the defa
devis wrote:
Please run some unix or at least read about the unix permission system,
and lets pray god this sheds some light in your mono cultured brains.
Here are the relevant points:
1) Despite recent ameliorations of MS ( multi user finally, permissions
... ) and some effort at making the sy
On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 11:50:33AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Linux integration: Tools register themselves as optional add-ons to add new
> or extended functionality. If the tool isn't there, all that happens is the
> menu items *for that added function* end up greyed out or don't show up,
Hello, joe!
Autoconfig script may enumerate hosts which don't require a proxy.
Usually there are a very few intranet servers in corporate network.
You should have prefixed "there are very few... " with one of two things
1. Relative to the internet...
2. In my experience...
I said "usually". What'
Hey Guys this is reallly getting on to ur egoes. loyality pays
royality at times.after all we all play with what pays. its high time
we realise most of the vendor certifications are over rated and dnt
guarantee the depth of knowledge. The HR people are a real piece of
morons all over if atall certi
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Georgi Guninski
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 3:01 PM
To: Micheal Espinola Jr
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: joe the "expert" (was Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe
as FireFox )
On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 06:06:
Ah, nostalgia...
I have appropriately suppressed many of my memories in this regard.
-ASB
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:22:24 -0500, joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Behalf Of RandallM> The question above is answered IMHO as yes. Any one
That sentiment is particularly humorous coming from you...
-ASB
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:01:12 +0200, Georgi Guninski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 06:06:10PM -0500, Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
> > Your accusations again joe's expertise and knowledge in this area are
> > comp
ola Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: joe the "expert" (was Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as
FireFox )
On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 06:06:10PM -0500, Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
> Your accusations again joe's expertise and knowledge in this area ar
On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 06:06:10PM -0500, Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
> Your accusations again joe's expertise and knowledge in this area are
> completely unsubstantiated.
>
i have not seen any proofs of joe's expertise or knowledge - can you give
some proofs?
for me joe is just a chatterbox in be
rinco
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 3:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: joe the "expert" (was Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as
FireFox )
"joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [1] Don't get me started on MCSEs. As a whole I
think they hurt Windows
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of RandallM> The question above is answered IMHO as yes. Any one
who admins
> or is a PC support person would have to agree. Come'on, if you
> change their monitor they freak out that there folders are now
> gone!
Absolutely. One
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shoshannah
Forbes
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 3:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
Well, Mac OSX is a fully consumer *nix. Can you say that Mac users tend to
be " already knowledgeable wit
]
Subject: RE: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
On Sat, 2004-11-20 at 08:20, joe wrote:
> I agree with your initial comment, they can both be changed. I also
> agree they both do little.
>
> I don't agree that the hardcoding in the source does anything fo
joe wrote:
Anyway, the base cause is a simple one, Windows is consumer based and *nix
wasn't and really still isn't. Look at the market penetrations. *nix tends
to have people already knowledgeable with its workings or people who WANT to
learn the details using it,
Well, Mac OSX is a fully consumer
Well Done. I did myself start to spend more time explaining what i
before thought users couldn't comprehend and i have achieved surprising
results.
No, they won't suddenly change, but at least it has saved me from re
doing the same thing over and over again. They do listen. They do not
want pro
Todd Towles wrote:
Windows doesn't tell you about the Admin account and makes the default
user a Admin. That isn't best method as you know.
RunAs is great..but that is only good once you create a normal user -
and then delete your new default user. Or you log in in Administrator
and take away
Its not because it has a great market 'penetration' in the 'real' world
that it isn't wrong. Not saying it was wrong before...but nowadays...we
know better than DOS, don't we ? Lets not go into the argument NT isn't
DOS etc etc ...please.
So even if the world IT computing economy is standing on
--Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of devis
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 11:10 AM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
1) Despite recent ameliorations of MS ( multi user finally, permissions
... )
__
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of devis
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 11:10 AM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
Do MS really think the users are stupid ? Do
Neither viewpoint is 100%. But, over-all I would have to agree with
joe. MCSE's (in my experience) are typically not worth the credit
[automatically] applied to them - not unless they have the experience
to back it.
That is of course true for any certification in any industry. MCSE's
are easy t
20, 2004 3:03 PM
> To: Todd Towles
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> This is true. It will also play many other types of files
> (with something like ffdshow) that WMP 9/10 can, although it
> will do so with
"joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [1] Don't get me started on MCSEs. As a whole I
think they hurt Windows far
> more than any other thing. A bunch of people who
feel they are experts in
> Windows because they took a couple of tests that 10
year olds could memorize
> and pass and yet still not be
1:15 AM
> To: Todd Towles
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> Dude, mplayer2 rulez!! I use it to play all sorts of things.
> =) I'm glad they left it there... the newer MS media player
> is just b
Vincent Archer wrote:
Other apps flatly refuse to work with anything but IE. None of these
are strictly "web applications" anymore - they are applications that use
an UI processor, which happens to be the HTML processor as well.
You see, this is precisely the problem.
HTML processors in web brow
> To: Todd Towles
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
> >
> > Dude, mplayer2 rulez!! I use it to play all sorts of things.
> > =) I'm glad they left it there... the newer MS media player
> > i
> Jeremy Davis
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 8:40 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> Are you able to change root's name in nix? Why not if the
> answer is no?
> (Things would break right? UID 0?) K
On Sat, 2004-11-20 at 08:20, joe wrote:
> I agree with your initial comment, they can both be changed. I also agree
> they both do little.
>
> I don't agree that the hardcoding in the source does anything for you.
Well, it *allows* you to change the ID of the superuser account to
something else.
ECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 5:14 PM
To: Crotty, Edward
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:12:31 EST, "Crotty, Edward" said:
> I'm not a Win based guy (troll?) - Un*x here - and ev
On 15/11/2004, at 22:50, Stuart Fox ((DSL AK)) wrote:
> Can the Firefox settings be controlled centrally?
>Yes, and more flexible than IE versions zoo at user computers.
Download
>a Firefox ZIP (not Firefox_Setup_1.0.exe but Firefox 1.0.zip), unpack
it
>to R/O share on file server, edit JS config
ECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Knobbe
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 10:42 PM
To: Jeremy Davis
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 20:40, Jeremy Davis wrote:
> Are you able to change root's name in
o be worthless before I assume it in person.
--
Pro-Choice
Let me choose if I even want a browser loaded thanks!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of devis
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 11:10 AM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Fu
ssage-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeremy Davis
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 9:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
Are you able to change root's name in nix? Why not if the answer is no?
(Things w
Dude, mplayer2 rulez!! I use it to play all sorts of things. =) I'm
glad they left it there... the newer MS media player is just bloat.
Media Player Classic (that comes with RealAlternative and QuickTime
Alternative) is another one of my favs. =D
Yeah, not really anything to do with the topic, but
On 19 Nov 2004, at 18:40, Jeremy Davis wrote:
Are you able to change root's name in nix?
Sure. There's no reason why not.
Why not if the answer is no?
(Things would break right? UID 0?) Knowing the account name is
two-thirds of the battle.
A much better system is to have root's password unset (i.e.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of devis
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 11:10 AM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
1) Despite recent ameliorations of MS ( multi user finally, permissions
... ) and some effort at maki
and they are working towards it. It is just
going to take a good amount of work to do so. :o)
joe
--
Pro-Choice
Let me choose if I even want a browser loaded thanks!
-Original Message-
From: john morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 4:32 PM
To: joe
Cc:
On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 20:40, Jeremy Davis wrote:
> Are you able to change root's name in nix? Why not if the answer is no?
> (Things would break right? UID 0?) Knowing the account name is
> two-thirds of the battle.
> In windows it's fairly easy to change the admin name.
> Not a professional here j
Andrew Farmer wrote:
In fact, I'm not so sure it's even a component of Nautilus. Is this a
recent change?
Nope - it depends on how you install Nautilus, though. I know that on a
number of RH systems I've had to configure lately, Mozilla is a
dependancy (not firefox) because Nautilus seems to u
Dear Joe,
So many out there use MS OS doesnt make it the best just as so many
people go to McDonalds doesnt mean they make the best food
--
(FROM LINKS TO LINKS WE ARE ALL LINKED)
cheers.
morris
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Char
Are you able to change root's name in nix? Why not if the answer is no?
(Things would break right? UID 0?) Knowing the account name is
two-thirds of the battle.
In windows it's fairly easy to change the admin name.
Not a professional here just curious...
J
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:13:36 -0500, [EMA
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:12:31 EST, "Crotty, Edward" said:
> I'm not a Win based guy (troll?) - Un*x here - and even I was offended by #1.
>
> There is such a thing as "runas" for Windows.
Yes, but is *the main design* of the system "run as a mortal, and use
the 'runas' for those things that need m
On 19 Nov 2004, at 08:35, Xavier Beaudouin wrote:
Thanks. I thought that it had more meanings :-D
Given that Firefox is integrated in Linux...
It isn't.
<...>
Result : Firefox is not integrated in Linux, it is a third party
software as /bin/bash or whatever that is given as a giveaway on
> Microsoft integration: You remove the application that plays
> MPEG movies from a system that has never needed to play MPEG
> movies, and never will need to - and your system won't boot anymore.
Example - Anyone with XP, do a search for mplayer2.exe? What is this
you ask? It is media player 6
dear j0e,
all i wanted to say is that there are minorities in the real world, who don't
load a browser or even graphics and they don't need anyone to "let" them.
i believe these "minorities in real world" can do more things than the
windoze lusers (whose main purpose is to be free shell providers
Crotty, Edward
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 12:13 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> I'm not a Win based guy (troll?) - Un*x here - and even I was
> offended by #1.
>
> There is such a thing
ubject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
This message is primarily destined to all MS trolls, no matter their
levels, and i can see so many in this list that i am happy to target a
large audience.
Please run some unix or at least read about the unix permission sy
On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 10:51:43AM -0500, joe wrote:
> > Autoconfig script may enumerate hosts which don't require a proxy.
> > Usually there are a very few intranet servers in corporate network.
>
> You should have prefixed "there are very few... " with one of two things
>
> 1. Relative to the
Prevention is the best cure!
- Original Message -
From: "john morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
Firefox avoids several fundamental
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 3:55 AM
To: joe
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 09:22:33PM -0500, joe wrote:
> Pro-Choice
> Let me choose if I even want a browser loaded thanks!
>
what the fu
Could you please define "integrated"? English isn't my primary
language...
In:-D
Thanks. I thought that it had more meanings :-D
Given that Firefox is integrated in Linux...
¿Will I be able to use Linux wthout Firefox?
Yes.
Or, ¿is Firefox an operating system module?
No this is a program li
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:57:31 +0100, Borja Marcos said:
> Given that Firefox is integrated in Linux... ¿Will I be able to use
> Linux wthout Firefox? Or, ¿is Firefox an operating system module? Being
Hint: Linux is over 10 years old, and FireFox just came out. What did Linux
do before FF
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raoul
Nakhmanson-Kulish
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 5:01 AM
To: Esmond; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
Hello, Esmond!
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
In my opinion, there are two defintions for "integrated". For most
people, it means "a" works with "b". For Microsoft, it means "a" can
not work without "b". Firefox is definitelyl the former because I use
it both under Linux and under Windows, and I'm trying to get it to
work on my Zaurus.
On
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Could you please define "integrated"? English isn't my primary
language...
Integrated is similar to saying "is part of" or "united". For future
reference (and more info), Google can also be extremely handy in such
a case. Doing a Google search for:
Hello, Esmond!
Offline folders work as well as roaming profiles do : nice fast networks
and low overhead/beefy servers work well, odd things happen if you have
impatient users with laptops, wireless etc. Sometimes its simply easier
to have a scheduled task sync files to a local folder. This will al
Hello, Danny!
This makes sense now, thanks Raoul!
One more question: to make things more secure, do you have any tips on
what settings to change in the firefox.js file? It's contains a lot of
info. :)
Very usable references here:
http://thegoldenear.org/toolbox/windows/docs/mozilla-pre-config.html
In case no one else helped you with this, allow me to try. =)
> Could you please define "integrated"? English isn't my primary language...
Integrated is similar to saying "is part of" or "united". For future
reference (and more info), Google can also be extremely handy in such
a case. Doing a Goo
Hello, Esmond!
In my case, executable doesn't recide on workstation, it's placed on
network file server. There are only shortcut to
\\server\firefox\firefox.exe and user profile data on workstations.
Fixed workstations can do this. Do you have Laptop users using offline
folders?
No, I haven't tried
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
However Mozilla in Linux is integrated at some level...so they are
just the
same as I.E.
Could you please define "integrated"? English isn't my primary
language...
Borja.
- ---
Borja Marc
Hello, Danny!
So when you run the Firefox setup/installer, do you direct the
installation to \\server\firefox, and then once installed, you modify
only the two files Stuart Fox mentions?
Read my first message in this topic. I don't run Firefox installer at
all, on both workstation and server. I dow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Why is it that Microsoft's code has less quality even though all code
that's
written is instantly audited? (Each line of code is checked before it's
'passed' in to the code tree.)
Design, design and design. Also, design.
Writing programs isn't a s
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 09:22:33PM -0500, joe wrote:
> Pro-Choice
> Let me choose if I even want a browser loaded thanks!
>
what the fuck is this?
we can chose such things on our os, who must let you choose?
--
where do you want bill gates to go today?
__
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary E.
> Miller
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 2:09 PM
> To: Todd Towles
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
>
>
> I suggest you re-read about t
ric Paynter
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 4:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
But high quality code that has a sound and well documented architecture can
be more easily updated without messing up dependencies, whereas low quality
code can b
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary E. Miller
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 2:09 PM
To: Todd Towles
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
I suggest you re-read about the M$ anti-trust trial. This was
9 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
Unfortunatly, ms group policy do not handle mac, solaris, linux, ... only ms
toys can be configured using this.
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: htt
] On Behalf Of Gary E. Miller
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 2:09 PM
> To: Todd Towles
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
>
>
> I suggest you re-read about the M$ anti-t
---
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Towles
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 9:19 AM
To: joe; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
Microsoft made a bold step by changing security in SP2. It was going to
break stuff...and it
Title: RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>Unfortunatly, ms group policy do not handle mac, solaris, linux, ...
>only ms toys can be configured using this. I also think it is somewhat
>new and will probably be old (why don't you use this miracle ms tool
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Yo Todd!
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Todd Towles wrote:
> IE isn't part of the OS in Microsoft mind...but it is in the customers.
I suggest you re-read about the M$ anti-trust trial. This was certainly
NOT the M$ legal positiion.
RGDS
GARY
-
On Mon, November 15, 2004 11:25 am, joe said:
>> Everytime a Firefox exploit comes out..there is already a fix...
>> is that magic? No..it is good coding...
>
> Having a quick fix out is due to low complexity of issue and assisted by a
> lack of dependencies so you have reduced time for patching an
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 1:09 PM
> To: Todd Towles
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Yo Todd!
>
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Todd Towles w
Stuart Fox (DSL AK) wrote:
Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
> Can the Firefox settings be controlled centrally?
>Yes, and more flexible than IE versions zoo at user computers.
Download
>a Firefox ZIP (not Firefox_Setup_1.0.exe but Firefox 1.0.zip),
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:33:26 -0600, Todd Towles
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It doesn'tI was responding to another off-topic message. But they
> again, how many messages on FD same on topic for more than 10 messages.
> =)
Fair enough
> Who do you think posted the original "IE is just as safe
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:07:56 -0600, Todd Towles
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Darwin and BSD...Darwin is the open source kernel that OS X uses...=)
What does this have to do with IE and Firefox, again?
...D
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charte
n telling me it was
OT..which is given.
> -Original Message-
> From: Danny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 10:28 AM
> To: Todd Towles
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> O
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, JxT wrote:
I believe it says "The BSD layer is based on the BSD kernel, primarily
FreeBSD." It does not says the OSX kernel.
peep developer.apple.com if you really don't believe me ;-) it's a
tad more reliable then wikipedia
For those interested in technical details, there's
t: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> I believe it says "The BSD layer is based on the BSD kernel,
> primarily FreeBSD." It does not says the OSX kernel.
>
> peep developer.apple.com if you really don't believe me ;-)
> it's a tad
er systems, but Microsoft has room for
improvement to say the least.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 1:26 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosu
I believe it says "The BSD layer is based on the BSD kernel, primarily
FreeBSD." It does not says the OSX kernel.
peep developer.apple.com if you really don't believe me ;-) it's a
tad more reliable then wikipedia
-JxT
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:41:35 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED
TED] On Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 1:42 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
>
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 11:53:46PM -0600, JxT wrote:
> >"The BSD layer is based on the BSD
rdshire Council
Hereford, UK
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Ron DuFresne
> Sent: 15 November 2004 20:02
> To: Gregory Gilliss
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as s
Title: Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
> Can the Firefox settings be controlled
centrally?>Yes, and more flexible than IE versions zoo at user computers.
Download>a Firefox ZIP (not Firefox_Setup_1.0.exe but Firefox 1.0.zip),
unpack it>to R/O share on file
bkfsec wrote:
Rafel Ivgi, The-Insider wrote:
Firefox is not intgrated to the OS, because it doesn't have an OS.
Its just a trimmed Mozilla for windows..
Not exactly... it's a mozilla core in a native application, as opposed
to an interpreted XUL front-end. It's a bit faster in both GNU/Linux
a
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:34 AM
Subject: Re: [in] Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE is just as safe as FireFox
> Quoting Raoul Nakhmanson-Kulish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Hello, Curt
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
