On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Jamon Camisso <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2015-01-31 10:38 AM, Thomas Milne wrote: >>>> It's such an dangerous thing to do if you think at it from security >> perspective. I usually just don't bother clicking on it > <snip> >> Nope. I was not even using a web browser. This is the problem. You are all >> making assumptions that are invalid. Read it or don't, I couldn't care less >> about people's paranoid fears. > > That's just inconsiderate. It only takes an extra second or two to copy > a link - no one's time is that important that they can't be bothered to > copy/paste a full URL.
This is what I am very patiently trying to explain. THERE NEVER WAS A FULL URL ANYWHERE. I WAS NOT USING A WEB BROWSER. Am I speaking Russian or are you people just thick? > I saw your post and just deleted it based on the link. Providing a > little context would go a long way toward helping engage your audience, > which I assume was your intent given the time spent even posting to the > list. > > To understand why shortened links without context are an issue, take a > look at this Google generated short URL to CSIS's site: > http://goo.gl/GO9PkW If we never visited a link unless we knew what was there in advance, most of the Internet would be cut off from us. > If I were malicious and posted a link to a less *cough* reputable site, > then I could potentially do all sorts of nasty things to anyone who > opened it. > Yes we should always behave as if the worst possible thing is about to happen to us. -- Thomas Milne --- Talk Mailing List [email protected] http://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
