1995-11-17 - Re: Java & Netscape security [NOISE]

Header Data

From: “Richard Martin” <rmartin@aw.sgi.com>
To: mrm@netcom.com (Marianne Mueller)
Message Hash: 479a6c1cc7e570932077222398cb1fa0cb883d86f8250a1288d6ebb139c2d37f
Message ID: <9511161831.ZM14572@glacius.alias.com>
Reply To: <9511162108.AA08466@all.net>
UTC Datetime: 1995-11-17 03:40:03 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 11:40:03 +0800

Raw message

From: "Richard Martin" <rmartin@aw.sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 11:40:03 +0800
To: mrm@netcom.com (Marianne Mueller)
Subject: Re: Java & Netscape security  [NOISE]
In-Reply-To: <9511162108.AA08466@all.net>
Message-ID: <9511161831.ZM14572@glacius.alias.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Nov 16,  4:08pm, Dr. Frederick B. Cohen wrote:
> Subject: Re: Java & Netscape security (reply to misc. postings)
> > 3.  Postscript considered dangerous:   (insert-smiley)
> It seems clear from this that Netscape, or at least Marianne who seems
> to speak for Netscpe, doesn't understand the protection issues that my
> clients face.  I will nevertheless forward this official Netscape line
> to them so they can better understand why I tell them it is insecure.

Alright. I've lurked on this one-man issue long enough. The latest attack
was severely lacking in clue. Had Dr. Fred bothered to read EVEN the
.sig file, he *might* have noticed that Marianne works for SUN [three
letters], not Netscape [eight letters].

He *might* have noticed that she was writing from her personal account.

Perhaps Dr. Fred fails to realise that some people *aren't* speaking
for their entire company every time they write e-mail. [see fc.all.net--
i always enjoy pronouncing that nearly phonetically]

Dr. Fred will forward this `official Netscape line' to Netscape,
probably with the similar lack of proper attribution or recognition
of context. We can hope that the receiving end of Netscape possesses at
least those few cluons more which are required realise how far off
*anything* Dr. Fred is now writing.

To have some slight cpunks relevance, I will weigh in on the side of
`It's not X's responsibility to ensure that Y's software isn't broken.'
{for all X, Y in {software developers}} Why? For the same reason that
I'm not generally held accountable for, say, Gary Jeffer's opinions
or Tim May's: because I don't have any control over them.

richard

- --
Richard Martin                           I DON'T SPEAK FOR ALIAS|WAVEFRONT
Alias|Wavefront - Toronto Office [Co-op Software Developer, Games Team]
rmartin@aw.sgi.com/g4frodo@cdf.toronto.edu      http://www.io.org/~samwise
Trinity College UofT ChemPhysCompSci 9T7+PEY=9T8 Shad Valley Waterloo 1992


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMKvJkB1gtCYLvIJ1AQF0kwP9E1WZCflbNqGXBaOv1ipTiJdTHjB52aSy
YPhBmTBVKM/FsjekDY0nBmAOsZsj/ak/aUTnkUF5BayMv4dm9yBYb2uc6ow3molK
ijLKqbTnPJtNqQvr7VQZZqFvMwxaBxiyWvHp5ccVCIRXTJV/++YRPbx0dqJvnVMW
CytvDDJ2944=
=ZWg+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





Thread