Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?
From: David (thunderbolt01_at_netscape.net)
Date: 08/24/03
- Next message: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Previous message: $uRoot: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- In reply to: $uRoot: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Next in thread: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Reply: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Reply: Kristian Thy: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 18:03:03 GMT
$uRoot wrote:
>
> Blaster wasn't a virus - it was a worm. It had nothing to do with
> browsers, email or usenet. Furthermore, it only infected NT, 2000 & XP.
One question since I don't run any M$ products.
Does Mozilla on Windows automatically run attachments like IE
does? I was under the impression that it didn't but as I said I
don't run windows so have no way to test it.
-- Confucius: He who play in root, eventually kill tree. Registered with The Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org/ Slackware 9.0 Kernel 2.4.21 i686 (GCC) 3.3 Uptime: 7 days, 10:49, 1 user, load average: 2.31, 1.67, 1.43
- Next message: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Previous message: $uRoot: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- In reply to: $uRoot: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Next in thread: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Reply: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Reply: Kristian Thy: "Re: Mozilla vs IE when it comes to security?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|