On 15/01/2017 11:04, Derek Stewart wrote:
<>
If the operating system is in ROM, I donot think this is going to
work, also there is no or very limited Internet access for the QL
systems and I do not think hacker will see QDOS/SMSQ/E as a viable
target.
May I add this quote to my collection
On 15/01/17 09:23, Graeme Gregory wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2017, at 05:47 AM, Daniele Terdina wrote:
Not sure how you come to that conclusion, I used to work on Java and it
goes through a stringent security process.
AFAIK Flash used to be the most vulnerable software (when also taking
user
On Sun, 15 Jan 2017, at 05:47 AM, Daniele Terdina wrote:
> > Not sure how you come to that conclusion, I used to work on Java and it
> > goes through a stringent security process.
>
> AFAIK Flash used to be the most vulnerable software (when also taking
> user base into account), but since it
There's no 100% security, but unzipping on a QL or emulated QL (Java-based or
not) sounds like _extremely_ low risk, provided the uncompressed file is not
used directly on the PC.
> Not sure how you come to that conclusion, I used to work on Java and it
> goes through a stringent security
Is that part of the Psion suite...
Regards,
Derek
On 14/01/17 13:34, Dilwyn Jones wrote:
Geoff Wicks wrote:
This is off topic, but whenever I am phoned by "Microsoft tech
support" I put on my most sanctimonious voice:
"My dear boy, if the Good Lord had meant us to use computers he would
Geoff Wicks wrote:
This is off topic, but whenever I am phoned by "Microsoft tech support"
I put on my most sanctimonious voice:
"My dear boy, if the Good Lord had meant us to use computers he would
never have given us the abacus.",
I wouldn't have thought they would even dare ring you,
On 13/01/2017 22:40, Norman Dunbar wrote:
And I have been known to keep the "Microsoft tech support" people on the phone
for hours! At least when they are talking to me, they are not ripping off some
unsuspecting person.
Mind you, I wouldn't do any of the above with windows, even in a vm!
Evening Christopher,
On a Windows pc? Never open anything attached that you are suspicious of etc.
In a QL, just have fun. I wrote a QL virus many many years ago when all viruses
spread by floppy disc. I never released it into the wild.
Many viruses, trojans or whatever they are called this
jms1 wrote:
> I would have thought not a SQmulator as it runs in java and java is not
> particularly safe.
> Can Marcel answer for QPC1 or 2?
Security is not a design goal for a QL emulator. There is no security
in SMSQDOS anyway. But unless you're personally wanted by the NSA I'm
pretty sure
Hi,
On 13/01/2017 18:32, Christopher Cave wrote:
It is my normal practice to delete any email coming from an unknown or
suspect origin WITHOUT looking at any attachment. Today I took such an
attachment, a zip-file, and opened it with ACP in a QL-environment. There
was a .ru (Russian ?) email
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017, at 06:08 PM, jms1 wrote:
> Well that is an interesting point.
>
> How safe is the virtual QL machine?
> .
> I would have thought not a SQmulator as it runs in java and java is not
> particularly safe.
Not sure how you come to that conclusion, I used to work on Java and it
Well that is an interesting point.
How safe is the virtual QL machine?
.
I would have thought not a SQmulator as it runs in java and java is not
particularly safe.
Can Marcel answer for QPC1 or 2?
How about Virtual Box running another OS.
It is suggested any virtual machine is safe and is the
It is my normal practice to delete any email coming from an unknown or
suspect origin WITHOUT looking at any attachment. Today I took such an
attachment, a zip-file, and opened it with ACP in a QL-environment. There
was a .ru (Russian ?) email address embedded in the file. My usual
approach seems
I also get these, as they usually have an empty subject line I tried
to block them via OE's filters by rejecting an empty string in the
subject line, wouldn't work though, same thing in Thunderbird you
can mark them as junk but it wont work with the next one to arrive,
it a dodgy strategy
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 at 03:10:15, Dilwyn Jones wrote:
(ref: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
snip
Amazes me that people are prepared to waste their time pestering people
like me who have never and never will knowingly respond to junk
mail/email/texts. Always amazes me how people take the attitude that
With junk mail and email I take the attitude that if they have to
reach
out to me in this way, their product is obviously such a lot of crap
that nobody in their right mind would buy it of their own free will.
Even worse are junk phone calls.
I am sure you are pestered by these, including
- Original Message -
From: Dilwyn Jones
To: QL Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 11:42 AM
Subject: [ql-users] email attachments
OK, I know I'm asking for it with Lookout Excess, but anyone know why the
attachment indicator paperclip shows on emails
gwicks wrote:
- Original Message - From: Dilwyn Jones
To: QL Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 11:42 AM
Subject: [ql-users] email attachments
OK, I know I'm asking for it with Lookout Excess, but anyone know why
the attachment indicator paperclip shows
OK, I know I'm asking for it with Lookout Excess, but anyone know why
the attachment indicator paperclip shows on emails with no attachment.
I go into properties and it says no attachment.
I generally delete such emails without reading them, so may well have
deleted some QLers emails
19 matches
Mail list logo
