full-disclosure - How big is the danger of IE?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <36003.198.162.158.16.1089324248.squirrel@198.162.158.16>
From: eric at arcticbears.com (Eric Paynter)
Subject: How big is the danger of IE?

On Thu, July 8, 2004 2:17 pm, joe said:
>
> http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/713878
>
> The link above is the advisory that theregister is talking about. I know
> it is unusual for theregister but they seemed to have missed a hefty part
> of the whole advisory when reporting it.

Yes, we've all seen it. I'm pretty sure that was posted here a few days ago.

The amazing part is that CERT, a vendor-neutral organization who usually
only provides information about how to secure a product, who does not
counsel on product choice, has made a recommendation to consider
alternatives to IE. Have they ever made such a recommendation in the past?
Certainly not that I'm aware of.

They must really think IE is simply not a viable tool for use on the
Internet. And since IE is an integral part of Windows (according to sworn
testimony by MS), then that would imply Windows is not a viable tool for
use on the Internet.

-Eric

--
arctic bears - affordable email and name services
http://www.arcticbears.com