Anthony G. Atkielski wrote:
Duane writes:
I disagree with this statement about javascript, as much as I dislike
javascript as the next person, there are times when the most user
friendly way of doing things was resorting to javascript.
Perhaps on one percent of all pages, but that is all. And pa
Duane writes:
> I disagree with this statement about javascript, as much as I dislike
> javascript as the next person, there are times when the most user
> friendly way of doing things was resorting to javascript.
Perhaps on one percent of all pages, but that is all. And pages should
still work
Nelson B wrote:
> self-issued certa and "oppotunistic encryption" do NOTHING to help out
> those 299/300 BTW. They don't need more encryption. They need to know
> when to stop.
I ended up doing an entry on our blog about it and basically came to the
same conclusion...
People every day don't do
Duane wrote:
http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/UNID/FCC8B6B48B24CDF2CC2570020018FF73?OpenDocument&pub=Computerworld
Up to 300 BankDirect customers were presented with a security alert when
they visited the bank's website earlier this month — and all but one
dismissed the warning and carried on wi
http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/UNID/FCC8B6B48B24CDF2CC2570020018FF73?OpenDocument&pub=Computerworld
Up to 300 BankDirect customers were presented with a security alert when
they visited the bank's website earlier this month — and all but one
dismissed the warning and carried on with their ba
On Sunday 15 May 2005 04:14, Anthony G. Atkielski wrote:
> Ian G writes:
> > By way of comparison, in the same time frame,
> > my company chose Java for desktop clients for
> > security reasons, and even though our result is
> > much more secure and robust, we can't get people
> > to install Java w
