cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1995-09-22 - Re: Another Netscape Bug (and possible security hole)

Header Data

From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
To: dmandl@panix.com
Message Hash: 3bc2a4c0ba738cabc55c323337adc83b1bd08362008742ccd3412849fe5a0e49
Message ID: <199509222019.QAA16468@homeport.org>
Reply To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950922154119.7388A-100000@panix.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-09-22 20:19:43 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 22 Sep 95 13:19:43 PDT

Raw message

From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 95 13:19:43 PDT
To: dmandl@panix.com
Subject: Re: Another Netscape Bug (and possible security hole)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950922154119.7388A-100000@panix.com>
Message-ID: <199509222019.QAA16468@homeport.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


dmandl@panix.com wrote:
| On Fri, 22 Sep 1995, Adam Shostack wrote:

| > 	I keep hearing this thought.  Isn't Win95 with its
| > 'executables in email' much more dangerous than Java, which at least
| > tries to address security?
| 
| Is that the new MS-Word you're thinking of?  I hear that it lets you
| imbed macros containing executable code in documents.  That's got to
| be one of the most dangerous ideas ever cooked up.

	No, this is a seperate problem.  Its not auto-executing code
in Microsoft documents that worries me, so much as the ability to
include executables as clickable images in a mail message, with the
user having no control over what environment the program executes in.

	If strong fences make good neighbors, where are the fences in
my network neighborhood?

Adam

-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume

Thread