php-general Digest 25 Jun 2011 04:13:51 -0000 Issue 7374
Topics (messages 313693 through 313715):
Re: Manipulate Request Headers after Redirect
313693 by: Louis Huppenbauer
313696 by: Arthur Moczulski
313697 by: Louis Huppenbauer
Re: [PHP-DB] Re: radio form submission
313694 by: Tamara Temple
313698 by: Chris Stinemetz
313700 by: Vitalii Demianets
313701 by: Richard Quadling
313703 by: Tamara Temple
313707 by: Richard Quadling
313708 by: Chris Stinemetz
313711 by: Jim Giner
313714 by: Andre Polykanine
Re: php session_start dead lock
313695 by: Zaccone, Warren
How PHP handles memory on exit
313699 by: Brad Lorge
Upgrade or Die?
313702 by: admin.buskirkgraphics.com
313704 by: Richard S. Crawford
313705 by: james.nixsecurity.org
313706 by: Andy McKenzie
313709 by: Ashley Sheridan
313710 by: Robert Cummings
313712 by: Richard Quadling
313713 by: Nam Gi VU
313715 by: admin.buskirkgraphics.com
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-subscr...@lists.php.net
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-unsubscr...@lists.php.net
To post to the list, e-mail:
php-gene...@lists.php.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for your response, but I don't think that will do.
First - SERVER_PORT is the port the apache/iis/whatever server is
working with (usually 80 or 443)
Second - That would still be manipulating the headers for the response
(As php mostly just generates the response, and not the request).
I'm thinking more and more that this is not really a php-question (as
it is server-side), but more of a js-question (client-side).
thanks anyway!
louis
2011/6/24 <ad...@buskirkgraphics.com>:
> Try
>
>
> If($_SERVER['SERVER_PORT'] == "302")
> {
> header('Referer: example.net');
> }
>
>
> Richard L. Buskirk
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Louis Huppenbauer [mailto:louis.huppenba...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 3:05 AM
> To: php-gene...@lists.php.net
> Subject: [PHP] Manipulate Request Headers after Redirect
>
> Hi there!
>
> I just have a small question concerning the http-protocol and php (and
> in specific the header-function, i think).
> Is it possible to manipulate the headers for the request which is sent
> after a 302-header?
>
>
> eg:
>
> Response:
> header('Referer: example.com');
> header('Location: example.net');
>
> Request (for the 302):
> header('Referer: example.net');
> header('Cache: max-age=0);
>
>
> I think I need that for a login to a tomcat app from an external
> php-form. As of now the Login works fine, I just have to reload the
> page to actually be logged in (and that is quite a bother).
>
>
> Sincerely yours
> Louis
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey,
this is what I understand: you want to manipulate headers of the request
sent by the client directly after receiving a 302 response?
If that's the case, than read further ;)
Any client goes through the following process while communicating with a
web-server:
1. get IP address from the domain (achieved thanks to DNSs)
2. create an IP socket connection with the obtained IP address
3. write an HTTP request through the socket
4. receive an HTTP response from the web-server. the "answer" will include
status compatible with the HTTP protocol.
In your example this process is repeated twice:
1. get ip of domain using dns
2. open a connection
3. write an http request to the socket
4. receive http with 302 status
(the client as an http protocol compliant software continues with the
alternative url provided by the 302 response)
5. get ip of domain specified as alternative url in received 302 using dns
6. open a new connection
7. write an http request to the newly opened socket
8. receive http response from web-server
Your problem is exactly between point 4 and 5. Unfortunately for you that's
client software's work to determine what will be done next. HTTP compliant
software (which every browser is) will follow the redirection. So, unless a
client provides you with some way of manipulating this behaviour, which is
quite unlikely, this can't be done.
Javascript won't be too much help in here as js scripts loaded into the
browser live only in the lifetime of displaying the specific response. As
302 responses can't include any content like javascript code which can live
in the lifetime of processing the response, so you can't control what's
going on in here.
The only way that comes my mind is to check if 302 response can hold any
"force behaviour" sort of information which is taken under consideration by
the client. Unfortunately, I don't think HTTP protocol specification defines
anything like that (however something definitely worth checking).
What you can try though is extending whole the communication between client
and web-server. So:
1. send the original request
2. receive the 302 response
3. send the request for alternative url
4. web-server checks the referrer of the request received and sends an
answer needed, so you receive a response which guides your client
To achieve that you need an access to the server-side application.
Let me know if that's any help.
On 24 June 2011 08:37, Louis Huppenbauer <louis.huppenba...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Thanks for your response, but I don't think that will do.
>
> First - SERVER_PORT is the port the apache/iis/whatever server is
> working with (usually 80 or 443)
> Second - That would still be manipulating the headers for the response
> (As php mostly just generates the response, and not the request).
>
> I'm thinking more and more that this is not really a php-question (as
> it is server-side), but more of a js-question (client-side).
>
> thanks anyway!
> louis
> 2011/6/24 <ad...@buskirkgraphics.com>:
> > Try
> >
> >
> > If($_SERVER['SERVER_PORT'] == "302")
> > {
> > header('Referer: example.net');
> > }
> >
> >
> > Richard L. Buskirk
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Louis Huppenbauer [mailto:louis.huppenba...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 3:05 AM
> > To: php-gene...@lists.php.net
> > Subject: [PHP] Manipulate Request Headers after Redirect
> >
> > Hi there!
> >
> > I just have a small question concerning the http-protocol and php (and
> > in specific the header-function, i think).
> > Is it possible to manipulate the headers for the request which is sent
> > after a 302-header?
> >
> >
> > eg:
> >
> > Response:
> > header('Referer: example.com');
> > header('Location: example.net');
> >
> > Request (for the 302):
> > header('Referer: example.net');
> > header('Cache: max-age=0);
> >
> >
> > I think I need that for a login to a tomcat app from an external
> > php-form. As of now the Login works fine, I just have to reload the
> > page to actually be logged in (and that is quite a bother).
> >
> >
> > Sincerely yours
> > Louis
> >
> > --
> > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> >
> >
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thank you for your answer!
You are more or less correct - And as I saw it to be too much work (or
just more or less impossible) I changed my approach to the problem.
I am now sending several separated request with JavaScript (jQuery to
be exact) without a 302, since I know in advance where I'll have to go
anyway.
So this issue can be considered closed!
Sincerely yours
Louis
2011/6/24 Arthur Moczulski <arthur.moczul...@gmail.com>:
> Hey,
> this is what I understand: you want to manipulate headers of the request
> sent by the client directly after receiving a 302 response?
> If that's the case, than read further ;)
> Any client goes through the following process while communicating with a
> web-server:
> 1. get IP address from the domain (achieved thanks to DNSs)
> 2. create an IP socket connection with the obtained IP address
> 3. write an HTTP request through the socket
> 4. receive an HTTP response from the web-server. the "answer" will include
> status compatible with the HTTP protocol.
> In your example this process is repeated twice:
> 1. get ip of domain using dns
> 2. open a connection
> 3. write an http request to the socket
> 4. receive http with 302 status
> (the client as an http protocol compliant software continues with the
> alternative url provided by the 302 response)
> 5. get ip of domain specified as alternative url in received 302 using dns
> 6. open a new connection
> 7. write an http request to the newly opened socket
> 8. receive http response from web-server
> Your problem is exactly between point 4 and 5. Unfortunately for you that's
> client software's work to determine what will be done next. HTTP compliant
> software (which every browser is) will follow the redirection. So, unless a
> client provides you with some way of manipulating this behaviour, which is
> quite unlikely, this can't be done.
> Javascript won't be too much help in here as js scripts loaded into the
> browser live only in the lifetime of displaying the specific response. As
> 302 responses can't include any content like javascript code which can live
> in the lifetime of processing the response, so you can't control what's
> going on in here.
> The only way that comes my mind is to check if 302 response can hold any
> "force behaviour" sort of information which is taken under consideration by
> the client. Unfortunately, I don't think HTTP protocol specification defines
> anything like that (however something definitely worth checking).
> What you can try though is extending whole the communication between client
> and web-server. So:
> 1. send the original request
> 2. receive the 302 response
> 3. send the request for alternative url
> 4. web-server checks the referrer of the request received and sends an
> answer needed, so you receive a response which guides your client
> To achieve that you need an access to the server-side application.
> Let me know if that's any help.
> On 24 June 2011 08:37, Louis Huppenbauer <louis.huppenba...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for your response, but I don't think that will do.
>>
>> First - SERVER_PORT is the port the apache/iis/whatever server is
>> working with (usually 80 or 443)
>> Second - That would still be manipulating the headers for the response
>> (As php mostly just generates the response, and not the request).
>>
>> I'm thinking more and more that this is not really a php-question (as
>> it is server-side), but more of a js-question (client-side).
>>
>> thanks anyway!
>> louis
>> 2011/6/24 <ad...@buskirkgraphics.com>:
>> > Try
>> >
>> >
>> > If($_SERVER['SERVER_PORT'] == "302")
>> > {
>> > header('Referer: example.net');
>> > }
>> >
>> >
>> > Richard L. Buskirk
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Louis Huppenbauer [mailto:louis.huppenba...@gmail.com]
>> > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 3:05 AM
>> > To: php-gene...@lists.php.net
>> > Subject: [PHP] Manipulate Request Headers after Redirect
>> >
>> > Hi there!
>> >
>> > I just have a small question concerning the http-protocol and php (and
>> > in specific the header-function, i think).
>> > Is it possible to manipulate the headers for the request which is sent
>> > after a 302-header?
>> >
>> >
>> > eg:
>> >
>> > Response:
>> > header('Referer: example.com');
>> > header('Location: example.net');
>> >
>> > Request (for the 302):
>> > header('Referer: example.net');
>> > header('Cache: max-age=0);
>> >
>> >
>> > I think I need that for a login to a tomcat app from an external
>> > php-form. As of now the Login works fine, I just have to reload the
>> > page to actually be logged in (and that is quite a bother).
>> >
>> >
>> > Sincerely yours
>> > Louis
>> >
>> > --
>> > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
>> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Jun 24, 2011, at 6:28 AM, Chris Stinemetz wrote:
So I am trying to keep this simple and just assign the value with the
radio button and then insert it into mysql database, but with the
following code I am getting the mysql error: Unknown column '250kbps'
in 'field list' when I choose the first radio button.
I think it has to do with the value being a string, but I haven't been
able to figure out the fix.
This one's fairly simple. You need to surround string values in the
SQL with quote marks (single or double will do so it doesn't get
confused about what the value you're trying insert is.
" .
$_POST['post_tptest'] . ",
'" . $_POST['post_tptest'] . "',
Since you're using double quotes to enclose the SQL statement, use
single quotes to enclose the actual string you're inserting.
Did you know that if you use a PHP variable inside a double quoted
string it will be interpolated correctly? No need to break it up with
concatenation, etc., if you don't want to. It's possibly debatable
which is the best practice and which is a bigger performance hit.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That worked perfectly!
Thank you,
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Friday 24 June 2011 17:28:08 Chris Stinemetz wrote:
> That worked perfectly!
And will work, until you decide to put quotes in button name for some reason.
And until some malicious user forge POST request with
$_POST['post_tptest'] = "'; DROP DATABASE; --"
But you can use prepared statements to be safe ) ...and they don't need all
those fancy quoting/escaping/sanitizing ...and they have advantages for
repetitive operations.
And furthermore, I think Carthage must be destroyed.
--
Vitalii
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 24 June 2011 15:44, Vitalii Demianets <vi...@nppfactor.kiev.ua> wrote:
> On Friday 24 June 2011 17:28:08 Chris Stinemetz wrote:
>> That worked perfectly!
>
> And will work, until you decide to put quotes in button name for some reason.
> And until some malicious user forge POST request with
> $_POST['post_tptest'] = "'; DROP DATABASE; --"
> But you can use prepared statements to be safe ) ...and they don't need all
> those fancy quoting/escaping/sanitizing ...and they have advantages for
> repetitive operations.
> And furthermore, I think Carthage must be destroyed.
http://xkcd.com/327/
--
Richard Quadling
Twitter : EE : Zend : PHPDoc
@RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY : bit.ly/lFnVea
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Jun 24, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Richard Quadling wrote:
On 24 June 2011 15:44, Vitalii Demianets <vi...@nppfactor.kiev.ua>
wrote:
And furthermore, I think Carthage must be destroyed.
Let's haul out the PHP war wagons!
http://xkcd.com/327/
I so wanted to rename my daughter "Little Chelsea Tables" after I read
that one. Randall is one mean mofo.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 24 June 2011 18:23, Tamara Temple <tamouse.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 24, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Richard Quadling wrote:
>
>> On 24 June 2011 15:44, Vitalii Demianets <vi...@nppfactor.kiev.ua> wrote:
>>>
>>> And furthermore, I think Carthage must be destroyed.
>>
>
> Let's haul out the PHP war wagons!
>
>> http://xkcd.com/327/
>
> I so wanted to rename my daughter "Little Chelsea Tables" after I read that
> one. Randall is one mean mofo.
And because it is so relevant, I added it to the docs...
http://docs.php.net/manual/en/security.database.sql-injection.php
--
Richard Quadling
Twitter : EE : Zend : PHPDoc
@RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY : bit.ly/lFnVea
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
#### radio select validation ####
What I am doing wrong?
I want to make sure a radio button is selected, but my current code
allows insertion even when radio button isn't selected.
My code is:
//Generating radio buttons for store type with
array
echo 'Store type:<br /><br />';
$choices = array('corporate' =>
'Cricket owned | ',
'premier' => 'Premier dealer');
foreach ($choices as $key => $choice) {
echo "<input type='radio' name='store_type' value='$key'/>
$choice \n";
}
//Validate the radio button submission
if
(!array_key_exists($_POST['store_type'], $choices)) {
echo "You must select a valid choice.";
}
Thanks
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Call me backwards, but I prefer to keep my statements simple. I would first
obtain the POST value before trying to pull up an array element.
$stype=$_POST[''store_type'];
if (!isset($stype))
(handle missing radio button)
else
$st_name=$choices[$stype];
for me (and the next guy who has to look at the code) this is simpler to
follow, IMHO.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Chris,
Maybe I'm off topic, but wouldn't you consider JavaScript form
validation? That will make your task easier and the user will see
his/her error much earlier, before he/she submits the form.
--
With best regards from Ukraine,
Andre
Skype: Francophile
My blog: http://oire.org/menelion (mostly in Russian)
Twitter: http://twitter.com/m_elensule
Facebook: http://facebook.com/menelion
------------ Original message ------------
From: Chris Stinemetz <chrisstinem...@gmail.com>
To: rquadl...@gmail.com
Date created: , 9:44:05 PM
Subject: [PHP] Re: [PHP-DB] Re: radio form submission
#### radio select validation ####
What I am doing wrong?
I want to make sure a radio button is selected, but my current code
allows insertion even when radio button isn't selected.
My code is:
//Generating radio buttons for store type with
array
echo 'Store type:<br /><br />';
$choices = array('corporate' =>
'Cricket owned | ',
'premier' => 'Premier dealer');
foreach ($choices as $key => $choice) {
echo "<input type='radio' name='store_type' value='$key'/>
$choice \n";
}
//Validate the radio button submission
if
(!array_key_exists($_POST['store_type'], $choices)) {
echo "You must select a valid choice.";
}
Thanks
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
We ran the checks and found no problems with the disks. All disks are
accessible, there are no I/O errors or disk access errors. What has me
bewildered is this started happening quite recently. If it's not hardware, then
perhaps a new usage pattern is revealing a flaw in our php session handling
code.
I have a suspicion it may be related our use of AJAX. When a page is loaded
in the browser we invoke PHP scripts asynchronously while another page may
still be loading, which could cause two threads at the same time to want to
lock the same session file in /var/tmp. I am wondering if such a thing could
result in a perpetual deadlock in php_flock when invoked from session_start.
We have a PHP script loading a page and from the page we have a javascript
invoking another php script via Ajax which posts data that refreshes content
dynamically via the DOM.
The script that is invoked via AJAX is not calling session_start, it is
invoking session_id() only. Yet it works. It does reuse the same session id as
we establish context with a database using it. I am going to play with this
and see if adding session_start before session_id() in the php script that is
executed via AJAX may be involved.
When you said, there could be other things - please share some other ideas.
perhaps others have seen this? as well as if anyone thinks this theory has
validity.
thank you.
-----Original Message-----
From: paras...@gmail.com [mailto:paras...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Brown
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 3:42 PM
To: Zaccone, Warren
Cc: php-gene...@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP] php session_start dead lock
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 15:27, Zaccone, Warren <wzacc...@telcordia.com> wrote:
> We recently started experiencing a problem on our server (httpd 2.2.19, PHP
> 5.3.6) where all of the apache child processes hang in PHP code and no longer
> process requests.
>
> I am running Apache as prefork on Solaris 10 with 256 children, and found
> that within a few minutes all 256 httpd child processes are stuck, and it's
> always in the same place within php_session_start in a php_flock call.
> Stack trace is shown below.
>
> The file it is trying to flock is
> /var/tmp/sess_2e39aabaf226819b67f29da477892e91.
May want to consider fsck'ing that drive, Warren. You may have
some bad clusters that are causing disk I/O issues. Just one of many
possibilities, of course, but the least favorite of all, obviously.
--
</Daniel P. Brown>
Network Infrastructure Manager
http://www.php.net/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey All,
I have a question pertaining to how PHP handles the residual values in
memory once a thread exits. I am working on some credit card processing
logic and would like to ensure that the values I am working with are not
being left to their own fortune after the application exits. Out of habbit,
I have just been overwriting all the sensitive variables with x's (strings
only).
The concerns I have are:
- Am I wasting my time? Does PHP already do this?
- If a sensitive var had somehow been cast as an int, and then I
overwrite it as a string, does that just change the pointer to another *
copy* of the var typecast, or does it actually overwrite the original?
- Does PHP store the argv/$_SERVER/$_REQUEST vars anywhere other than
what is reachable in userland? If so is there a way to ensure they do not
persist?
Any help you can provide would be hugely useful!
Regards,
Brad
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In shifting gears to a faster pace of development and release, Mozilla has
opted to abandon security support for Firefox 4 immediately upon the release
of version 5, which came out this week.
This could be a risky move, since many users neglect to update their
browsers immediately for various reasons, despite the pop-up reminders
Firefox periodically displays.
I will never understand this mindset.
Full story : http://www.technewsworld.com/edpick/72739.html
Richard L. Buskirk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That is indeed frustrating. I upgraded to FF 4 a month ago or so, and it's
been nothing but a hassle. Out of frustration, I switched to Chrome, and I
haven't looked back.
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:16 AM, <ad...@buskirkgraphics.com> wrote:
> In shifting gears to a faster pace of development and release, Mozilla has
> opted to abandon security support for Firefox 4 immediately upon the
> release
> of version 5, which came out this week.
>
> This could be a risky move, since many users neglect to update their
> browsers immediately for various reasons, despite the pop-up reminders
> Firefox periodically displays.
>
> I will never understand this mindset.
>
>
>
> Full story : http://www.technewsworld.com/edpick/72739.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Richard L. Buskirk
>
>
>
>
--
Sláinte,
Richard S. Crawford (rich...@underpope.com)
http://www.underpope.com
Publisher and Editor in Chief, Daikaijuzine (http://www.daikaijuzine.com)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chrome. Enough said. Now, if we can only convince the rest of the world ...
>---- Original Message ----
>From: <ad...@buskirkgraphics.com>
>To: php-gene...@lists.php.net
>Sent: Fri, Jun 24, 2011, 1:17 PM
>Subject: [PHP] Upgrade or Die?
>
>In shifting gears to a faster pace of development and release, Mozilla has
>opted to abandon security support for Firefox 4 immediately upon the release
>of version 5, which came out this week.
>
>This could be a risky move, since many users neglect to update their
>browsers immediately for various reasons, despite the pop-up reminders
>Firefox periodically displays.
>
>I will never understand this mindset.
>
>
>
>Full story : http://www.technewsworld.com/edpick/72739.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Richard L. Buskirk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:30 PM, <ja...@nixsecurity.org> wrote:
> Chrome. Enough said. Now, if we can only convince the rest of the world ...
>
Ugh. I can't stand Chrome. Of course, I gave up on Firefox years ago
and went back to Opera, so it doesn't bother me when Firefox does
something weird like this...
-Andy
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 13:38 -0400, Andy McKenzie wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:30 PM, <ja...@nixsecurity.org> wrote:
> > Chrome. Enough said. Now, if we can only convince the rest of the world ...
> >
>
> Ugh. I can't stand Chrome. Of course, I gave up on Firefox years ago
> and went back to Opera, so it doesn't bother me when Firefox does
> something weird like this...
>
> -Andy
>
Meh, I'm still using 3.6 on my main computer and 3.5 on my laptop. Using
Fx4 at work, and I have to say, I prefer 3.6. Fx4 is slower, prone to
crashing and a bit of a memory hog. I really hope Mozilla doesn't go the
way of Google and create loads of new versions dropping support for the
older ones as it goes, even if the 'older' versions are barely that old
at all.
--
Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 11-06-24 01:16 PM, ad...@buskirkgraphics.com wrote:
In shifting gears to a faster pace of development and release, Mozilla has
opted to abandon security support for Firefox 4 immediately upon the release
of version 5, which came out this week.
This could be a risky move, since many users neglect to update their
browsers immediately for various reasons, despite the pop-up reminders
Firefox periodically displays.
I will never understand this mindset.
Full story : http://www.technewsworld.com/edpick/72739.html
I downloaded version 497.3 from the future, it's great, it deletes
itself before finishing the install because it knows there's a new more
advanced version already out.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
E-Mail Disclaimer: Information contained in this message and any
attached documents is considered confidential and legally protected.
This message is intended solely for the addressee(s). Disclosure,
copying, and distribution are prohibited unless authorized.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 24 June 2011 19:39, Ashley Sheridan <a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 13:38 -0400, Andy McKenzie wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:30 PM, <ja...@nixsecurity.org> wrote:
>> > Chrome. Enough said. Now, if we can only convince the rest of the world ...
>> >
>>
>> Ugh. I can't stand Chrome. Of course, I gave up on Firefox years ago
>> and went back to Opera, so it doesn't bother me when Firefox does
>> something weird like this...
>>
>> -Andy
>>
>
>
> Meh, I'm still using 3.6 on my main computer and 3.5 on my laptop. Using
> Fx4 at work, and I have to say, I prefer 3.6. Fx4 is slower, prone to
> crashing and a bit of a memory hog. I really hope Mozilla doesn't go the
> way of Google and create loads of new versions dropping support for the
> older ones as it goes, even if the 'older' versions are barely that old
> at all.
That pattern of behaviour sounds exactly like Netscape all those years ago.
--
Richard Quadling
Twitter : EE : Zend : PHPDoc
@RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY : bit.ly/lFnVea
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dear James,
In case you love Chrome that much, be sure you not using its `remember
password` feature or any one else share using your PC/laptop will see it
super-easily!
Nam
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 12:30 AM, <ja...@nixsecurity.org> wrote:
> Chrome. Enough said. Now, if we can only convince the rest of the world ...
>
>
> >---- Original Message ----
> >From: <ad...@buskirkgraphics.com>
> >To: php-gene...@lists.php.net
> >Sent: Fri, Jun 24, 2011, 1:17 PM
> >Subject: [PHP] Upgrade or Die?
> >
> >In shifting gears to a faster pace of development and release, Mozilla has
> >opted to abandon security support for Firefox 4 immediately upon the
> release
> >of version 5, which came out this week.
> >
> >This could be a risky move, since many users neglect to update their
> >browsers immediately for various reasons, despite the pop-up reminders
> >Firefox periodically displays.
> >
> >I will never understand this mindset.
> >
> >
> >
> >Full story : http://www.technewsworld.com/edpick/72739.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Richard L. Buskirk
>
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The message for Netscape was very clear, the development community refused to
write for it they had started a precedence that could not be forgotten.
I say communities will not forget this act and remove the browser from their
systems rather than be forced into an update for security reasons.
Honestly, rarely do any of my customers use FF, and their reasons are justified
in their mind, so I do not argue the point.
This is another reason for security personnel, to credit their policies in
denying FF on their network the same as they did with Netscape.
Richard L. Buskirk
Senior Software Engineer/Systems Administrator
You can’t grow your business with systems that are on life support...
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Quadling [mailto:rquadl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 5:38 PM
To: a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk
Cc: Andy McKenzie; php-gene...@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP] Upgrade or Die?
On 24 June 2011 19:39, Ashley Sheridan <a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 13:38 -0400, Andy McKenzie wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:30 PM, <ja...@nixsecurity.org> wrote:
>> > Chrome. Enough said. Now, if we can only convince the rest of the world ...
>> >
>>
>> Ugh. I can't stand Chrome. Of course, I gave up on Firefox years ago
>> and went back to Opera, so it doesn't bother me when Firefox does
>> something weird like this...
>>
>> -Andy
>>
>
>
> Meh, I'm still using 3.6 on my main computer and 3.5 on my laptop. Using
> Fx4 at work, and I have to say, I prefer 3.6. Fx4 is slower, prone to
> crashing and a bit of a memory hog. I really hope Mozilla doesn't go the
> way of Google and create loads of new versions dropping support for the
> older ones as it goes, even if the 'older' versions are barely that old
> at all.
That pattern of behaviour sounds exactly like Netscape all those years ago.
--
Richard Quadling
Twitter : EE : Zend : PHPDoc
@RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY : bit.ly/lFnVea
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--- End Message ---
