[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <40284F76.2040005@onryou.com>
From: lists2 at onryou.com (Cael Abal)
Subject: Apparently the practice was prevalent
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I'm of the opinion that reinterpreting these particular ancient RFCs
is really of no practical use and that this thread probably deserves
to die a quiet death.
The fact of the matter is, regardless of what the RFCs have to say
about the subject, Microsoft's abandoning of the username:password
http/https feature should drastically hinder an entire class of
unelegant phishing schemes. This is a good thing.
The patch will also act as another (albeit tiny) nudge away from the
tradition of passwords saved and used in-the-clear, which is also a
good thing.
Does anything else really need to be said?
C
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFAKE92R2vQ2HfQHfsRAkFtAKDFcJ066Y2tZyywnC7PArwedVezdwCeJPfO
cRPsvmzrtG/B0qbxoxROFec=
=Bd96
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Powered by blists - more mailing lists