Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(November 1996)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: ActiveX and RISKS
From: Benedikt Stockebrand <benedikt @ devnull . ruhr . de>
Date: 18 Nov 1996 19:35:39 +0100
To: "Mark Joseph Edwards" <mark @ ntshop . net>
Cc: <Firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM>
In-reply-to: "Mark Joseph Edwards"'s message of Mon, 18 Nov 1996 10:17:36 -0600
References: <19961118162220316 . AAA215 @ beast . ntshop . net>

"Mark Joseph Edwards" <mark @
 ntshop .
 net> writes:

> Peter wasted bandwidth with:
> 
> >???
> >What does CGI have to do with ActiveX?
> >I'm afraid I must be missing some subtlety here.
> 
> What does your message have to do with this list? Go back to sleep.

Eh?  I think we've already had a discussion about the insecurity
aspects of ActiveX and friends abusing HTTP right on this very list.
I'd recommend you check some back issues dealing with this problem.
See <c=US%a=_%p=Toronto%l=MAIL-960830132632Z-20 @
 mail .
 rc .
 toronto .
 on .
 ca>
for a starter.

-- 
Ben(edikt)? Stockebrand    Runaway ping.de Admin---Never Ever Trust Old Friends
My name and email address are not to be added to any list used for advertising
purposes.  Any sender of unsolicited advertisement e-mail to this address im-
plicitly agrees to pay a DM 500 fee to the recipient for proofreading services.


References:
Indexed By Date Previous: RE:Incoming TCP Packet with Port 80 ??
From: Dave Horsfall <dave @ fgh . oz . au>
Next: Re: Pointcast and bandwidth log analyis
From: Paul Ferguson <pferguso @ cisco . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: ActiveX and RISKS
From: Todd Graham Lewis <lists @ reflections . mindspring . com>
Next: RE: ActiveX and RISKS
From: Russ <Russ . Cooper @ RC . on . ca>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com