IE is successful because it wins on the details. It's not as standards compliant. However, it has none of the shit that you have to wade throught to make Netscape 6 usable. It doesn't install MSN instant messanger.
At least it doesn't do it yet. I wouldn't be surprised if something like that happened in the near future. Just look at what happened to Media Player. Media Player 6.X was a nice little application to play multimedia files while the new 7.0 is a big bloated piece of s*it.
We have about twenty developers using both Windows and Linux and VSS seems to work nicely enough. I would have preferred CVS but the Windows guys didn't like the fact that you can't lock the file you are editing (it's possible but it's not the CVS way). SourceOffSite has a nice (commercial) client available for Linux so that I don't have to use VSS Win32 client and a Samba share (puke) for Linux development.
This is the original LoveLetter. A email worm, rewritten to function in a UNIX environment.
It contains of a so-called shell script which, when executed, will email itself to all addresses found in the files.muttrc and.mailrc, as well as user names picked from the local password file etc/passwd.
It uses the UNIX standard mail program mailx to do this."
Are there any email programs for Linux that allow executing a program or a script just by clicking it?
Bruce Schneier mentioned something like this while covering the DVD encryption hack in the November Crypto-Gram (monthly newsletter). See here
" It might be a bitter pill for the entertainment industry to swallow, but software content protection does not work. It cannot work. You can distribute encrypted content, but in order for it to be read, viewed, or listened to, it must be turned into plaintext. If it must be turned into plaintext, the computer must have a copy of the key and the algorithm to turn it into plaintext. A clever enough hacker with good enough debugging tools will always be able to reverse-engineer the algorithm, get the key, or just capture the plaintext after decryption. And he can write a software program that allows others to do it automatically. This cannot be stopped.
If you assume secure hardware, the scheme works. (In fact, the industry wants to extend the system all the way to the monitor, and eventually do the decryption there.) The attack works because the hacker can run a debugger and other programming tools. If the decryption device and the viewing device (it must be both) is inside a tamperproof piece of hardware, the hacker is stuck. He can't reverse-engineer anything. But tamperproof hardware is largely a myth, so in reality this would just be another barrier that someone will eventually overcome. Digital content protection just doesn't work; ask anyone who tried software copy protection."
Slashdot Mirror
The site (squeeze.sorenson.com) was already dead before Slashdot even posted the news. Poor little Apache, sniff.
At least it doesn't do it yet. I wouldn't be surprised if something like that happened in the near future. Just look at what happened to Media Player. Media Player 6.X was a nice little application to play multimedia files while the new 7.0 is a big bloated piece of s*it.
More about SourceOffSite here.
"UNIX/LoveLetter.A
This is the original LoveLetter. A email worm, rewritten to function in a UNIX environment.
It contains of a so-called shell script which, when executed, will email itself to all addresses found in the files .muttrc and .mailrc, as well as user names picked from the local password file etc/passwd.
It uses the UNIX standard mail program mailx to do this."
Are there any email programs for Linux that allow executing a program or a script just by clicking it?
me too!
</AOL>
Dune was actually the second DVD I bought when I got my player.
Bruce Schneier mentioned something like this while covering the DVD encryption hack in the November Crypto-Gram (monthly newsletter). See here
" It might be a bitter pill for the entertainment industry to swallow, but software content protection does not work. It cannot work. You can distribute encrypted content, but in order for it to be read, viewed, or listened to, it must be turned into plaintext. If it must be turned into plaintext, the computer must have a copy of the key and the algorithm to turn it into plaintext. A clever enough hacker with good enough debugging tools will always be able to reverse-engineer the algorithm, get the key, or just capture the plaintext after decryption. And he can write a software program that allows others to do it automatically. This cannot be stopped.
If you assume secure hardware, the scheme works. (In fact, the industry wants to extend the system all the way to the monitor, and eventually do the decryption there.) The attack works because the hacker can run a debugger and other programming tools. If the decryption device and the viewing device (it must be both) is inside a tamperproof piece of hardware, the hacker is stuck. He can't reverse-engineer anything. But tamperproof hardware is largely a myth, so in reality this would just be another barrier that someone will eventually overcome. Digital content protection just doesn't work; ask anyone who tried software copy protection."