Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: another product affected by recent MS IE '@' patch


From: martin f krafft <madduck () madduck net>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:52:36 +0100

also sprach Nick FitzGerald <nick () virus-l demon co uk> [2004.02.08.2108 +0100]:
Actually, it is _far_ from a _typical_ MS fix.

thanks for your reply, it made me check out rfc 1630 and, tataa,
user:pass@server/url is non-standard. thus, this is in fact the most
surprising fix from M$ in a long time.

Second, it is very unlike MS to "fix" something when they know it will 
break some systems based on the "broken" behaviour.

unless of course it could harm competitors. then they will gladly do
so.

... and absolutely ridiculous), ...

Ahhhh -- so you're another genius who believes it is "ridiculous" to 
implement standards-conforming behavior?  Or are you another genius who 
believes it is ridiculous for MS to implement improved security 
behaviour in its historically insecure web browser?

Or perhaps you believe _both_ changes are ridiculous?

i retract my statement. i wrote that message on the train without
access to the RFC. i should have known better.

-- 
martin;              (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
  \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; net@madduck
 
invalid/expired pgp subkeys? use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
 
"marriage is the only adventure open to the cowardly."
                                                           -- voltaire

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Current thread: