Previously:
>Netscape won't install a plugin without the user saying so.
IE is the same...
>When the browser goes ahead
>and downloads "Kludgescript 13" because it's got a signature the browser
>likes without asking you, you've got a problem from now until Microsoft
>comes up with some way of revoking certificates.
Hmmm, am I missing something? You have to tell the browswer what certificates
to accept. If you tell the browswer to blindly accept all certificates, then
that isn't ActiveX's fault... That's the same as blindly installing plug-ins
or downloading ANYTHING and running it without checking where it came from or
what it does. Isn't the bigger issue really about user knowledge though? If
we don't trust our users to decide for themselves, then we should stick with
a limited (Java?) VM or a more limited browser such as Mosaic. Of course,
while we're considering that direction, we should also consider X terminals,
or maybe even going back to VT100 or 3270 terminals attached to a mainframe.
Then we could really protect the users from themselves! That's the direction
of the Network Computer - take the responsibility away from the user. But if
we trust our users, then they should be allowed to choose for themselves...
And as for the other users in the world that I'm not the system administrator
for, isn't it up to them to decide? Should I "protect" them from something
that they haven't asked me to protect them from? And indeed, is there really
all that much to protect them from?
-Doug
Doug Wellington
doug @
sun1paztcn .
wr .
usgs .
gov
System and Network Administrator
US Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ Project Office
According to proposed Federal guidelines, this message is a "non-record".
Hmm, I wonder if _everything_ I say is a "non-record"...?
Lynx - a much safer and much faster browswer!
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
