Robert Heller a écrit :
[snip]
Linux does not care about file *names*.
indeed Linux does not. but desktop managers do. That said, *.exe attacks
should only affect systems running Wine.
[snip]
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
At Sun, 19 Apr 2009 15:07:05 +0200 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
Robert Heller a écrit :
[snip]
Linux does not care about file *names*.
indeed Linux does not. but desktop managers do. That said, *.exe attacks
Are you sure? I would think that *Linux*-based desktop
Robert Heller a écrit :
At Sun, 19 Apr 2009 15:07:05 +0200 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
Robert Heller a écrit :
[snip]
Linux does not care about file *names*.
indeed Linux does not. but desktop managers do. That said, *.exe attacks
Are you sure? I would think that
At Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:06:43 +0200 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
Robert Heller a écrit :
At Sun, 19 Apr 2009 15:07:05 +0200 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
Robert Heller a écrit :
[snip]
Linux does not care about file *names*.
indeed Linux does
Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Robert Nichols
rnicholsnos...@comcast.net wrote:
snip
My problem with NoScript is that there is virtually no site that I visit
that does not require scripting to function properly.
I think there is a mis-understanding of how noscript
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Michael A. Peters mpet...@mac.com wrote:
snip
I whitelist my router, youtube, etc. and the domains for forums I visit.
I am beginning to do that. And hopefully nothing whitelisted will have
the ability to attack
I sometimes disable noscript when making
On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 21:14 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Lanny Marcus wrote:
My belief is that this is not possible, but there are many extremely
knowledgeable people participating on this list and I would like to
know if it is in fact possible. I am running CentOS 5.3 (32 bit) fully
From: MHR mhullr...@gmail.com
Install the FireFox extension noscript and be very careful about what
domains you authorize scripting from.
Is there such a thing for Seamonkey, or is this not required? (Or is
this a check with Mozilla question?)
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Spiro Harvey sp...@knossos.net.nz wrote:
Lanny Marcus lmmailingli...@gmail.com wrote:
the forum, which is a highly restricted area. Today when it happened,
what exactly is *it*?
Spiro: When I saw the pop ups, their file waiting for me to click, to
OK it for
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Michael A. Peters mpet...@mac.com wrote:
Lanny Marcus wrote:
snip
My experience is that when browsing on any OS and you come across an
error message stating that your computer is infected and you need to
install such and such software, the web site I was
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:23 AM, JohnS jse...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 21:14 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
snip
If it makes you feel any safer I will go there and down load it on my
CentOS Desktop! BUT! If your running WINE Then that is another storie I
would NOT.
No WINE
On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 11:13 -0500, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Michael A. Peters mpet...@mac.com wrote:
Lanny Marcus wrote:
snip
My experience is that when browsing on any OS and you come across an
error message stating that your computer is infected and you need
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:25 AM, William L. Maltby
centos4b...@triad.rr.com wrote:
On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 11:13 -0500, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Michael A. Peters mpet...@mac.com wrote:
snip
My experience is that when browsing on any OS and you come across an
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
on 4-17-2009 9:33 AM Lanny Marcus spake the following:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:25 AM, William L. Maltby
centos4b...@triad.rr.com wrote:
On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 11:13 -0500, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
snip
Noscript will give you an idea of just how many sites run a script of some
kind. You will see a large part of sites just look different when the scripts
don't run, and some don't function at all. Not that it is a bad
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Rob Townley rob.town...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
Remember the NeXT step days (for me, mid 90's) when a single
executable binary file contained both intel and PowerPC/Motorola code.
When clicked, it would execute the intel code on the intel platform
and the
At Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:07:31 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
on 4-17-2009 9:33 AM Lanny Marcus spake the following:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:25 AM, William L. Maltby
centos4b...@triad.rr.com
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Robert Heller hel...@deepsoft.com wrote:
At Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:07:31 -0500 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
on 4-17-2009 9:33 AM Lanny Marcus spake the following:
On Fri,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 8:57 AM, John Doe jd...@yahoo.com wrote:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=seamonkey+noscript+pluginl=1 ;P
I am properly chastised - mea culpa
Ccrow Crow Cow Cw C (gulp)
mhr
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
snip
Noscript will give you an idea of just how many sites run a script of some
kind. You will see a large part of sites just look different when the scripts
don't run, and some don't function at all. Not that it is a bad
Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
snip
Noscript will give you an idea of just how many sites run a script of some
kind. You will see a large part of sites just look different when the scripts
don't run, and some don't function at all.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Robert Nichols
rnicholsnos...@comcast.net wrote:
snip
My problem with NoScript is that there is virtually no site that I visit
that does not require scripting to function properly. The net result is
an almost knee-jerk reaction to click on Allow all this page,
Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
snip
Noscript will give you an idea of just how many sites run a script of some
kind. You will see a large part of sites just look different when the scripts
don't run, and some don't function at all.
My belief is that this is not possible, but there are many extremely
knowledgeable people participating on this list and I would like to
know if it is in fact possible. I am running CentOS 5.3 (32 bit) fully
updated. Browser is Mozilla Firefox v.3.0.7.
I believe both times this happened, once
Lanny Marcus lmmailingli...@gmail.com wrote:
the forum, which is a highly restricted area. Today when it happened,
what exactly is *it*?
Install-2006-60.exe which I declined, etc. Comes from
http://antispywarepcscanner.com Is there any way the Firefox web
browser could have been
Lanny Marcus wrote:
My belief is that this is not possible, but there are many extremely
knowledgeable people participating on this list and I would like to
know if it is in fact possible. I am running CentOS 5.3 (32 bit) fully
updated. Browser is Mozilla Firefox v.3.0.7.
I believe both
26 matches
Mail list logo
