Re[2]: Replying to your message dated Thursday, September 14, 2000, at 9:54 AM

[ztrader]

On Sunday, September 17, 2000, 11:12:31 PM, you wrote:
TF> Wait a minute. Whether I get a link sent to me whcih points to a file
TF> or I get the file as an email attachment, is the same security risk:
TF> either I click on it or not.

I thought you were advocating sending a 'hollow' message with only a
link, then TB AUTOMATICALLY gets the content and opens/executes it
with no operator intervention. This would make it look to the operator
as though the link were the message. Convenient and transparent, but a
hazard.

As long as the viewer knows that it is a download and can intervene,
it is essentially the same as what TB does now. Not a problem.

TF> Only, with the FTP, I have to download (duplicate) it onto my
TF> designated drive first.

Best for checking the file.

TF> No, the link idea is good. I have never seen it work, but I like it
TF> and see no special security reasons to forbid it.

As long as it is not opened/executed automatically.

Probably was not as clear as I could have been on the objection.

ztrader

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org