On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 05:43:10PM +1100, Michael Lake wrote:
> Bill Bennett wrote:
"Assume someone has put something in your petrol that rots
piston heads and only piston heads. Eventually the engine
will fail.
*However* it's not going to affect me if my engine is a Wenkel."
I actually like this analogy. The particular immunity is a sort
of accidental thing, not necessarily an overall, inherent
strength of design.
> 1. Windows has historically either parsed or execcuted all attachments
> arriving in mail to thats its easy for the user if they are interested,
> even mildly, in the ad.
> 2. In Linux you have to explicitly save the attachment from the mail,
> set its exec permissions and then explicitly execute it as ./unknown_program
This is not quite true, as vim and emacs have had vulnerabilities
in the past where they executed content which could be malicious.
Anyone commenting on windows and unix should realise that
they're like people and chimpanzees. Even though they may
look quite different they share 98% of their dna.
Matt
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
