Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #33665 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-08 19:36 +0800 |
| Last post | 2016-02-10 22:39 +0100 |
| Articles | 11 on this page of 51 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
A very dark day indeed :-( Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-08 19:36 +0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 08:45 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2016-02-08 14:50 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 12:37 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 12:55 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-09 05:39 +0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 17:22 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 17:08 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 20:30 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 18:31 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 22:02 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 20:04 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:18 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:55 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 06:32 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 05:27 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 15:24 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 06:38 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 16:00 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 07:20 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 16:39 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 07:50 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 17:16 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:40 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 06:28 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 17:21 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:03 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 09:33 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 05:32 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 15:42 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 21:58 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2016-02-09 15:59 +0000
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 17:24 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2016-02-09 16:30 +0000
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 01:47 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 08:55 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 01:59 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:48 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 17:35 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:05 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 09:39 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:30 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:28 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:27 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 05:27 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:23 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 13:58 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 17:20 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2016-02-08 19:44 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 14:06 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Brixomatic <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-10 22:39 +0100
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | Silvio <silvio@internet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 09:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <56bc48c1$0$23760$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #33766 |
On 02/11/2016 04:05 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 2/10/2016 11:35 AM, Silvio wrote: >> On 02/10/2016 02:48 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> On 2/9/2016 7:59 PM, Silvio wrote: >>> Obviously people will only install a plugin/framework if they need it >>> for something. That is hardly surprising. >>> >>> If they need it then they do not seem to consider it a big problem. >>> Java, Flash and SL all was rather widespread when they were needed >>> for web browsing. >> >> Well, that depends. Many users have limited control over their own >> computer and installing a runtime will involve having heated discussions >> with stubborn and ill-informed system administrators. If they are >> working inside some Citrix like environment then their chance of success >> is even more limited. >> >> Ten years ago most corporations I encountered allowed the use of a JVM. >> That has changed dramatically in more recent years, at least here in >> Western Europe. > > 10 years ago the same corporations would strictly prohibit email access > from outside, but today they allow it. > > 10 years ago Java was necessary and external email access was not. Today > it is the other way around. > > Arne > My target audience happens to be heavily involved with high volume mail traffic (nothing to do with spamming). Not once have I encountered a corporation that had such an email policy. The second part is true: I never come across it now also. But maybe you work in a different market segment.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-09 20:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n9e3ri$1vcp$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #33720 |
On 2/9/2016 9:38 AM, Eric Douglas wrote: > On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 9:24:59 AM UTC-5, Silvio wrote: >> >> Does nothing for me but a prompt to save a file with a name ending >> with .jnlp and nothing after that. Basic Ubuntu desktop machine >> with OpenJDK 8 installed. Same result in Chromium and Firefox. > > Exactly. That's how web start works. That's why it's more secure > than applet. Web start doesn't run from the browser. It downloads > the jnlp needed to start the client application. You have to have a > JRE installed, then run the jnlp file to start it, If configured for it then the browser can launch Java Web Start with the JNLP file (without save and separate launch). Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-09 20:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n9e3oe$1vcp$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #33719 |
On 2/9/2016 9:24 AM, Silvio wrote: > On 02/09/2016 02:27 PM, Eric Douglas wrote: >> How so? reference? I've been using web start, I would guess roughly 8 >> years now. You can use it over the web, as in the following link. I >> use it for an application that runs on the domain from IIS. The >> application runs a server and client program, connecting the 2 JVMs >> with sockets. >> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/uiswing/examples/components/index.html >> >> Click any "Launch" link to see how web start works. > > Does nothing for me but a prompt to save a file with a name ending with > .jnlp and nothing after that. Basic Ubuntu desktop machine with OpenJDK > 8 installed. Same result in Chromium and Firefox. Then your PC is not configured to handle JNLP files. A Windows PC with Oracle Java and all defaults do register Java Web Start to handle JNLP files. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-09 20:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n9e3m4$1vcp$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #33716 |
On 2/9/2016 8:27 AM, Eric Douglas wrote: > On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 10:02:11 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> But from what I can see (and please correct me again if I'm >>> wrong) is all your example uses the browser for is downloading >>> the JNLP file? After that your running a desktop app in isolation >>> with nary an awareness that the browser exists. >> >> That is correct. >> > You sound very confused. You tell me "you click on a link, answer > yes to run and the Java app starts up". That "link" you click to > start is the file you downloaded. Then you tell the next guy "That > is correct", referring to the fact web start indeed has no connection > to the browser, which is why it is not going away like the applets. It happens that I get confused. But in this case I don't think it is that bad. "you click on a link, answer yes to run and the Java app starts up" and: "But from what I can see (and please correct me again if I'm wrong) is all your example uses the browser for is downloading the JNLP file? After that your running a desktop app in isolation with nary an awareness that the browser exists." are consistent. The browser is used to launch the application but nothing more. >> Java Web Start never became a success. >> > How so? reference? I've been using web start, I would guess roughly > 8 years now. It is based on: - very few questions here and in other Java fora - very few job ads asking for it - very few public known examples of usage >> And I think that what most people think about when they hear Java >> Web Start is the case where JNLP and Java Web Start is used to run >> applets. >> >> But that is really only a very special case. >> >> And even though I have not seen it described anywhere then I would >> expect this possibility to be dropped together with classic applet >> support. > > reference? I've never heard of that case, though it sounds more > secure than applets started from a browser since you had to run the > jnlp and acknowledge the security prompt authorizing the vendor to > get there. Reference to what? That it will also become deprecated? As I said I have not read anything about it. It is pure speculation based on an assumption about consistent behavior from Oracle. Applets via JLNP? I think I posted this link yesterday: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/deploy/applet_dev_guide.html#JSDPG1032 it describes it briefly. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-10 05:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <786f920d-3511-4e20-8d98-de63733ba79f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #33735 |
On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 8:27:55 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > The browser is used to launch the application but nothing more. > How do you configure your browser to launch a web start? When I click the Launch links in Chrome it downloads a jnlp, and I'm sure I haven't changed a setting for that. Chrome shows me my downloaded files at the bottom of the browser, so I can click it there to launch, or I can browse Windows Explorer to my downloads folder and launch from there. Regardless, the web start is not actually running in the browser, and there should still be a security prompt for unknown publishers. > >> Java Web Start never became a success. > >> > > How so? reference? I've been using web start, I would guess roughly > > 8 years now. > > It is based on: > - very few questions here and in other Java fora > - very few job ads asking for it > - very few public known examples of usage > That has nothing to do with web start 'never becoming a success'. How can you say companies don't use web start just because you haven't heard about it? It's a framework, not a language. There are plenty of questions and job ads for Java. My JNLP requires very little maintenance. All it does is tell the client where my web server is, so they can download the current jars to run the Java app, and they can connect to another JVM on that server using sockets. You probably won't see many questions about gas pedals on a car forum, that doesn't mean no one uses them. > >> And I think that what most people think about when they hear Java > >> Web Start is the case where JNLP and Java Web Start is used to run > >> applets. > >> > >> But that is really only a very special case. > >> > >> And even though I have not seen it described anywhere then I would > >> expect this possibility to be dropped together with classic applet > >> support. > > > > reference? I've never heard of that case, though it sounds more > > secure than applets started from a browser since you had to run the > > jnlp and acknowledge the security prompt authorizing the vendor to > > get there. > > Reference to what? > reference to your suggestion that web start is (only?) used to run applets. I've never heard of it being used for that, much less only used for that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-10 22:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n9gurt$8ur$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #33745 |
On 2/10/2016 8:27 AM, Eric Douglas wrote: > On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 8:27:55 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> The browser is used to launch the application but nothing more. >> > How do you configure your browser to launch a web start? When I > click the Launch links in Chrome it downloads a jnlp, and I'm sure I > haven't changed a setting for that. Chrome shows me my downloaded > files at the bottom of the browser, so I can click it there to > launch, That is having the browser launch Java Web Start. So you have it working. > or I can browse Windows Explorer to my downloads folder and > launch from there. That is not having the browser launch Java Web Start. > Regardless, the web start is not actually running > in the browser, True but "launching" and "running in" are two very different things. >>>> Java Web Start never became a success. >>>> >>> How so? reference? I've been using web start, I would guess >>> roughly 8 years now. >> >> It is based on: - very few questions here and in other Java fora - >> very few job ads asking for it - very few public known examples of >> usage >> > That has nothing to do with web start 'never becoming a success'. > How can you say companies don't use web start just because you > haven't heard about it? It's a framework, not a language. There are > plenty of questions and job ads for Java. My JNLP requires very > little maintenance. All it does is tell the client where my web > server is, so they can download the current jars to run the Java app, > and they can connect to another JVM on that server using sockets. > You probably won't see many questions about gas pedals on a car > forum, that doesn't mean no one uses them. If something is used a lot then the questions tend to be asked, jobs ads requiring the skills, blogs about its usage posted, constant enhancements from the vendor etc.. If some programming technology is practically invisible, then I expect it to be little used - not that it has some special characteristic that makes it live invisible. The car analogy is not good. Java Web Start is discussed less than other Java technologies (applets, JPA etc.) in Java forums. I think gas pedal is discussed as much as break pedal, gear changer, trunk lid etc. in a car forum. >>>> And I think that what most people think about when they hear >>>> Java Web Start is the case where JNLP and Java Web Start is >>>> used to run applets. >>>> >>>> But that is really only a very special case. >>>> >>>> And even though I have not seen it described anywhere then I >>>> would expect this possibility to be dropped together with >>>> classic applet support. >>> >>> reference? I've never heard of that case, though it sounds more >>> secure than applets started from a browser since you had to run >>> the jnlp and acknowledge the security prompt authorizing the >>> vendor to get there. >> >> Reference to what? >> > reference to your suggestion that web start is (only?) used to run > applets. I've never heard of it being used for that, much less only > used for that. Oh - my claim was not that the most users of Java Web Start used it for applets - my claim was that most users of Java considered Java Web Start (and JNLP) to be an applet thing without using either. A very large portion of Java developers tried writing a simple Java applet when they learned Java. And I think they noted that SUN/Oracle in the documentation started recommending using JNLP to launch applets. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-08 13:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <bbc1e60d-d699-4efc-ae7a-2f8d5c5d1304@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #33681 |
On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 12:55:36 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 2/8/2016 8:50 AM, Thomas Richter wrote: > > Actually, I believe this is good news. Java applets are an outdated and > > overaged technology, so time to get rid of it. Oracle killed it > > successfully. > > I think SUN and Mozilla/Google/Microsoft can also claim part of it. > > > What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the > > same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all > > the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems > > and the same issues to begin with. > > > > So why that helps is really not clear to me. > > Good question. > > Maybe because it prompts differently!? > > Arne I've never written an applet, but I think they were a security risk because they can execute code from a browser. Webstart does not execute. You have to download a .jnlp file then manually execute that, which downloads jar files, checks their signature and asks if you want to allow that author to run code..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-08 17:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n9b4b4$187f$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #33691 |
On 2/8/2016 4:58 PM, Eric Douglas wrote: > On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 12:55:36 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 2/8/2016 8:50 AM, Thomas Richter wrote: >>> What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the >>> same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all >>> the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems >>> and the same issues to begin with. >>> >>> So why that helps is really not clear to me. >> >> Good question. >> >> Maybe because it prompts differently!? > > I've never written an applet, but I think they were a security risk because they can execute code from a browser. Yes. > Webstart does not execute. You have to download a .jnlp file then manually execute that, which downloads jar files, > checks their signature and asks if you want to allow that author to run code.. Java Web Start also integrates with browser. For regular Java Web Start you click on a link, answer yes to run and the Java app starts up. If you want to try then: https://www.yworks.com/products/yfiles/demos#java And it is also possible to run Java applets via Java Web Start embedded in web page, but I suspect that is being treated like applets. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-08 19:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n9anmd$2qs$1@news2.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> |
| In reply to | #33675 |
Am 08.02.2016 um 15:04 schrieb Stefan Ram: > Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> writes: >> What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the >> same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all >> the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems >> and the same issues to begin with. > > It is true that Java indeed had security defects. But the press decided > to make it the scapegoat while no one is allowed to mention the elephant > in the room: JavaScript. Java executes downloaded code, Javascript executes downloaded code. Yes, Javascript is complex,and every program complex enough contains bugs, Javascript is no difference. The big difference between javascript and java is that the former is part of the browser engine and is hence updated by the vendor of the browser. The latter required a round-trip through Oracle, another level of indirection. Apparently, this worked not so well. Javascript has access to the DOM tree, Java does not.... so there are many differences. Did you answer my question concerning applets and webstart? I've rarely seen a webstart application, actually. It's even less integrated into the browser, so what's the point? > Before I append my usual Java... ...and your point is? I don't disagree that any javascript implementation will include bugs. In fact, any complex program will. The question rather whether we are willing to make the trade between flexibility and security in the web. Greetings, Thomas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-08 14:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n9ap04$jvp$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #33682 |
On 2/8/2016 1:44 PM, Thomas Richter wrote: > Am 08.02.2016 um 15:04 schrieb Stefan Ram: >> Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> writes: >>> What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the >>> same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all >>> the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems >>> and the same issues to begin with. >> >> It is true that Java indeed had security defects. But the press >> decided >> to make it the scapegoat while no one is allowed to mention the >> elephant >> in the room: JavaScript. > > Java executes downloaded code, Javascript executes downloaded code. Yes, > Javascript is complex,and every program complex enough contains bugs, > Javascript is no difference. The big difference between javascript and > java is that the former is part of the browser engine and is hence > updated by the vendor of the browser. The latter required a round-trip > through Oracle, another level of indirection. Apparently, this worked > not so well. On the other hand each browser has its own JavaScript engine (there are also multiple Java implementations, but for applet usage the SUN/Oracle is the only relevant one). I am not so sure that this is what makes the difference. I think some of the biggest problems of Java applets were: * the need to support privileged mode which really complicates the sandbox design * the choice to have a generic approach security to cover everything from applets to multi-customer servlet engines, which also complicates thing * lack of focus/funding/resources on applet security in the last years of SUN ownership > Javascript has access to the DOM tree, Java does not.... so there are > many differences. Java applets do have indirect access via the Java-JavaScript interface. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brixomatic <brixomatic@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-10 22:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3125cc82db90e30b9896ac@news.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #33675 |
In article <JavaScript-20160208150210@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>, Stefan Ram (ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de) says... > It is true that Java indeed had security defects. But the press decided > to make it the scapegoat while no one is allowed to mention the elephant > in the room: JavaScript. It always escaped me that Java Applets were blamed, while the ones to blame really were the browser vendors who had plugins, all of them, active by default. ActiveX got exploited because they did that, Flash was exploited because of the same reason, the Real Player was exploited because of this, Java was exploited this way, you name it: It got abused because it was executed automatically. The simple lesson was: Don't have plugins execute arbritrary code from the internet by default and without user notice. Simple as that. Got ignored for like 20 years, now they're removing their plugin interfaces alltogether and the next thing they'll do it have byte code executed by browser, as an alternative to Java Script, which is executing arbritrary code by default, worse: The browser doesn't even care that it's not signed. Which basically means they're sayng: If we can't get our plugins secure, let's execute the malware ourselves, oh and by the way: trust every code from the internet and never check if the code is the one that the author intended to run. Kind regards, Wanja -- ..Alesi's problem was that the back of the car was jumping up and down dangerously - and I can assure you from having been teammate to Jean Alesi and knowing what kind of cars that he can pull up with, when Jean Alesi says that a car is dangerous - it is. [Jonathan Palmer]
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web