Firewalls: Re: Re[2]: Active-X and/or Java?

Firewalls
(June 1996)

Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject:	Re: Re[2]: Active-X and/or Java?
From:	Michel Lavondes <lavondes @ tidtest . total . fr>
Date:	Wed, 12 Jun 1996 11:41:42 +0100
To:	Ron DuFresne <dufresne @ winternet . com>
Cc:	Michael_Beeler @ ccmail . northgrum . com, Jody Klein <jklein @ ncdc . noaa . gov>
In-reply-to:	Your message of "Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:21:02 CDT."

In message <Pine .
 SUN .
 3 .
 91 .
 960611182006 .
 23811A-100000 @
 parka .
 winternet .
 com>, Ron 
DuFresne writes:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 1996 Michael_Beeler @
 ccmail .
 northgrum .
 com wrote:
> 
> >      Just a thought, but does anyone know if Active-X is any more secure 
> >      than JAVA?
> >      
> 
> From what little I've read so far, much less secure than java at this time.
> 
Does anyone have a (pointer to a) description of active-X ?

Michel Lavondes (lavondes @
 tidtest .
 total .
 fr)
#include <disclaimer.h>
Governments are guilty until proved innocent

Indexed By Date	Previous:	Re: New Firewall Announcement From: Michel Lavondes <lavondes @ tidtest . total . fr>
Indexed By Date	Next:	Re: Maintenance of firewall-1 2.0 From: "Richard D. Stiennon" <richards @ netrex . com>
Indexed By Thread	Previous:	RE: Re[2]: Active-X and/or Java? From: Ron DuFresne <dufresne @ winternet . com>
Indexed By Thread	Next:	suscribe From: "JEAN-FRANCOIS BONHOMME" <bonhomme @ ahqps . alcatel . fr>