Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #23486
| From | Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? |
| Organization | Canadian Mind Products |
| Message-ID | <5dntm85s55qmuh8cort7l0uuji2mpo9eav@4ax.com> (permalink) |
| References | <kkknq8$3u2$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| Date | 2013-04-17 10:37 -0700 |
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 07:45:12 +0800, Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >Perhaps the most significant change will be that, in the default >setting, sites will not be able to force the small programs known as >Java applets to run in the browser unless they have been digitally >signed. This makes no sense. A digitally signed Applet does dangerous things. Unsigned ones do not. -- Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com Computer programming is the best remedy for pain (physical or emotional) I have encountered. It requires so much concentration there is nothing left over to pay attention to the pain. They should teach this in AA.
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
> Sandboxed power == More secure??? Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-04-17 07:45 +0800
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-16 22:12 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-04-16 19:25 -0700
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-16 22:30 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-04-17 09:14 -0700
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-04-17 13:09 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-04-17 11:37 -0700
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-04-17 15:49 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-17 19:10 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-17 19:13 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-04-17 21:12 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-17 21:34 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-17 21:39 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-17 19:06 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-04-18 03:04 +0200
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-04-17 10:37 -0700
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? paul.cager@gmail.com - 2013-04-17 10:54 -0700
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-17 19:02 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-04-25 10:09 +0800
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-24 22:30 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-04-25 08:54 -0700
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-26 22:11 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-04-26 20:05 -0700
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-27 22:23 -0400
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-04-28 12:09 +0100
Re: > Sandboxed power == More secure??? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-28 09:43 -0400
csiph-web