In reply to <mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
LG> Hi Goncalo, LG> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005, at 14:07:07 [GMT +0000] (which was 7:07 AM where LG> I live) you wrote: GF>> I'm sure you manage to get a better justification! LG> Let's expound a bit on this though Goncalo. Why exactly is it that LG> IE is so vulnerable in so many ways? It's because IE, like many LG> other Microsoft products, tries to do it all. Well, that's only LG> part of the reason, they try to integrate so much cross LG> application functionality is a better answer. They did this LG> because users wanted this and users wanted that. They did it LG> because Microsoft wanted a bigger market share. They wanted to LG> dominate. They wanted to be able to do it all. I disagree. It's vulnerable because MS was unable to anticipate the misuse of the technology they were providing. Now they made it more secure (not perfectly secure) without cutting down the functionality that people had. LG> But they screwed up. Users began to realize that functionality at LG> the cost of security wasn't acceptable. Microsoft won the browser LG> war, but it was a short lived win. What good are the spoils of war LG> if they really are spoiled and tainted. Power comes at a cost. It's not acceptable to have limits because some people just don't know any better. The car makers don't put speed limits in their cars because they might be bought by some lame driver that may kill himself. LG> Now granted. IE made their primary mistake because everything was LG> "on" by default. But my point is that Microsoft gave the users LG> what they wanted without ever trying to tell them why it was LG> risky. The internet used to be a wonderful place, now you have to LG> check, double-check and triple check just about everything you do. LG> Popups were a great idea at first. A nice way to display LG> information without disrupting the flow of the visitors browsing LG> of their main site. Now we have a whole box of bandaids to prevent LG> popups. MS didn't realize how their technology could be misused... LG> What I'm getting at is that the populace in general needs people LG> like Tony and Paul and myself to try and keep the sanity. Most Pleeeease... LG> people on this list are more tech savvy than the rest of the LG> population, and for every user we have here on the list, we have LG> 20 that aren't. People who won't know why enabling the download of LG> images can be a Bad Thing (tm), or why clicking the "Go to our LG> website to validate your bank account" links almost never take you LG> to your bank, or why Nigerian scams are just that, scams. People LG> are *still* getting sucked into those scams. How long have those LG> been around? Forever. But they still get people. Make an easy mode for 'rookie' users and a Power mode for power users. LG> People talk about applications nannying them. I agree, for us, the LG> people in the know, hate it. I hate it. But you tell me a viable LG> way to protect those not in the know and I'll go along with it. You don't really convince me that you hate that. In fact, you seem to like it alot. I like to be able to do everything and then choose what I don't want to do just because I want to not because I can't. LG> People in general do need to be protected from themselves. It LG> makes it rough on those of us in the know, but if it means my mom LG> and dad are protected I'm willing to sacrifice a bit of so-called LG> "functionality" to do that. I disagree. That sort of speak is good for the "big brother watching you". -- Best regards, Goncalo Farias Editing is a rewording activity. ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.0.9.1 Deep Alpha | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
