Re: FUD about security and file extensions (was Re: Why file content sniffing sucks)
- From: Blomberg David <dblomber Libertec com>
- To: Adam Williams <awilliam whitemice org>
- Cc: Charles Goodwin <charlie xwt org>, Gnome List <gnome-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: FUD about security and file extensions (was Re: Why file content sniffing sucks)
- Date: Sun Dec 28 19:00:03 2003
On Sat, 2003-12-27 at 02:14, Adam Williams wrote:
> > > 1. Windows hides the .exe
> > > 2. Even if windows does not have the .exe, the users are able to execute
> > > attached programs.
> > So you're advocating that all users know what .exe means. Oh, and .pl,
> > .py, .sh, etc etc. Yes, that's really a solution... not.
> > Or are you advocating that we kill email functionality by disallowing
> > the manual opening of attachments to protect the user?
> This debate is ludicrous.
do not discount that Linux/Unix files are not executable by default
(Mail clients can and probably will by pass this and it is a feature
that Lindows and other will get rid of "for end users ease of use)
2-the origional argument went that by "proper file extensions speed
would increase for a 1000+ item folder to show proper thumbnails" This
has more to due to number of items rather than figuring out the
extensions so the whole complaint is Ludicrous!
AIS, APS, ASE, CCNA, LCP, LCA, Linux+, LPI I, MCP, MCSA, MCSE, RHCE, Server+
dblomber libertec com
] [Thread Prev