Re: what if the message-ID generator generates a dirty word?
From: Karl Kleinpaste (karl@charcoal.com)Date: 01/21/02
- Next message: Jacques L'helgoualc'h: "Re: what if the message-ID generator generates a dirty word?"
- Previous message: Dodger: "Re: Hacking firewalls (they are mine - please read before plonking)."
- In reply to: Barry Margolin: "Re: what if the message-ID generator generates a dirty word?"
- Next in thread: Jacques L'helgoualc'h: "Re: what if the message-ID generator generates a dirty word?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Karl Kleinpaste <karl@charcoal.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 17:02:52 -0500
Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.net> writes:
> How about all-numeric (or mostly-numeric, except for username and date
> sections) message ID's?
Why should anyone care, considering that the flaw is imaginary in practice?
- Next message: Jacques L'helgoualc'h: "Re: what if the message-ID generator generates a dirty word?"
- Previous message: Dodger: "Re: Hacking firewalls (they are mine - please read before plonking)."
- In reply to: Barry Margolin: "Re: what if the message-ID generator generates a dirty word?"
- Next in thread: Jacques L'helgoualc'h: "Re: what if the message-ID generator generates a dirty word?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
