[suspicious - maybe spam] [PHP] [suspicious - maybe spam] Re: [PHP] RE: [suspicious - maybe spam] [PHP] [suspicious - maybe spam] RE: Issues with News sites again...

2005-09-14 Thread Death Gauge
net Subject: Re: [PHP] RE: [suspicious - maybe spam] [PHP] [suspicious - maybe spam] RE: Issues with News sites again... Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 10:40:34 -0500 (CDT) On Wed, September 14, 2005 9:46 am, Jay Blanchard wrote: > At the risk of starting another globals holy war, the reply that y

Re: [PHP] RE: [suspicious - maybe spam] [PHP] [suspicious - maybe spam] RE: Issues with News sites again...

2005-09-14 Thread Richard Lynch
On Wed, September 14, 2005 9:46 am, Jay Blanchard wrote: > At the risk of starting another globals holy war, the reply that you > received was a generalization that reflects the potential (< NOTE > THAT) > security risks from having register globals 'on'. The poster was > essentially > correct,

[PHP] RE: [suspicious - maybe spam] [PHP] [suspicious - maybe spam] RE: Issues with News sites again...

2005-09-14 Thread Jay Blanchard
[snip] I would be very worried about the quality of any reply that posts a link that says the opposite of what the person is saying. Nowhere in that link did I see them say that turning on the globals was a security issue. The page said the misuse of the globals was the security risk due to forg

[suspicious - maybe spam] [PHP] [suspicious - maybe spam] RE: Issues with News sites again...

2005-09-14 Thread Death Gauge
I would be very worried about the quality of any reply that posts a link that says the opposite of what the person is saying. Nowhere in that link did I see them say that turning on the globals was a security issue. The page said the misuse of the globals was the security risk due to forgetting