| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:45:59 -0400 From: Lucas Holt <luke@...lishgames.com> To: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com Subject: Re: Windows Server 2003 Security Guide available You do not need Microsoft Office to open word documents.. AppleWorks will do it, and maybe open office/star office? Granted, Microsoft has a monopoly. I think you can open word documents with Wordpad which is free (and lousy). If you are reading a windows security document, you probably have a windows box with wordpad. There used to be a word 97 viewer as well that was free. Plain text files would be the only "safe" format. Even Acrobat documents have security problems. Another thing that troubles me about this debate is MITM attacks period. Lets face it, any file format is susceptible to this sort of thing. I could put up a fake microsoft MSDN library website and use DNS poisoning to give developers bad documentation. What next? Force users to use SSL for all websites? Stop using the internet all together? > > What I found interesting is that some of the documentation is in > Microsoft Word or MS Excel format. This implies that to take full > advantage of the information, you need to own an MS Office license. > Is this another example of abuse of monopoly? For that matter, are > .doc > or .xls documents necessarily safer than .exe's? You decide... > > -- > David. > Lucas Holt Luke@...lishGames.com ________________________________________________________ FoolishGames.com JustJournal.com "The next generation of interesting software will be made on a Macintosh, not an IBM PC." -- Bill Gates (unconfirmed quote)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists