On 06/13/2015 12:07 PM, jd1008 wrote:> I think you are simply repeating you have learned > NOT by actually knowing the code and implemetation > the way the developer of the product knew it. Your info > is both dated and part of the marketing blurbs.So the published security model of two different Free Software languages is flawed, and no security researchers are publishing that?
On 06/12/2015 01:27 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:> On 06/13/2015 12:07 PM, jd1008 wrote: >> I think you are simply repeating you have learned >> NOT by actually knowing the code and implemetation >> the way the developer of the product knew it. Your info >> is both dated and part of the marketing blurbs. > > So the published security model of two different Free Software > languages is flawed, and no security researchers are publishing that?Look, believe what you wish :) Sleep tight. :) I loose no sleep at all :)
On 06/12/2015 12:58 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:> On 06/13/2015 09:55 AM, jd1008 wrote: >> The most offensive problems of using browsers is that >> they do not tell you nor ask your permission when javascripts >> spy on your entire storage contents. > > Neither javascript nor Java applets can access the local filesystem. > Applets launched by JNLP can do so, but that involves a pop-up that > asks the user's permission. > >> He said the "sandbox" is the entire storage on your computer. > > Misunderstandings do happen in natural language.NOP!! He stated NO misunderstanding. I think you are simply repeating you have learned NOT by actually knowing the code and implemetation the way the developer of the product knew it. Your info is both dated and part of the marketing blurbs. Question: 2 marketing execs are talking with each other. Which one of them is lying? ANS: The one whose lips are moving.