the URL is displayed in the status bar, instead of the location bar."
The URL is actually displayed at the bottom of the page in a "pseudo-status-bar" overlaying the page contents. And guess what happens if the background of the page at that area is dark or matching the URL font color.!
Do I see phishing attacks coming soon?
Last time I checked, by default login credentials are sent without encryption over http. Stealing the password is very easy in this case.
Everyone should make sure to use https instead. There's an option in the user account to enable https all the time.
It is quite scary actually. This proves many things.
1. Flesh is not a valid software firewall. We need upgrades.
2. The human body can't fight off computer viruses with our immune system.
3. His body didn't alert him of the virus. No fever or any symptom.
You're talking about the a different law (the one regarding export of cryptography). The relevant law in this context, regarding Syria for example, prohibits the export of US goods and technology to Syria. This includes all software products. That's why Google, Sun, Microsoft, etc have been blocking downloads in Syria for few years now.
From the website of US embassy in Syria:
The most comprehensive sanction, called the Syria Accountability Act (SAA) of 2004, prohibits the export of most goods containing more than 10% U.S.-manufactured component parts to Syria.
Great news, and this is a brave thing to do:)
Blindly blocking all SF projects to some people was wrong. I said this before, US export laws should only apply to US products. OpenSource/Free software projects should stay "open" and "free/libre" to everybody. Those who worked hard on these projects, including developers from the banned countries, should have the right to decide whether their projects should be blocked or not.
Some said the law applies to SF just because they host the projects. If the law was strict to this level then the whole internet should be banned to these countries.
These restrictions were initiated on Syria in 2005. I don't know about the other countries, but I'm pretty sure it all started during the Bush administration. So they're not really that old. But anyway, it's time they changed. The censorship Syrians are getting from the US side probably outweighs the Syrian censorship. Think of it, you can't download a lot of free software, no google apps, no sun JRE, no antiviruses, nothing!
I wasn't talking about licenses, I was talking about the principles of Free Software and Open Source Software, which necessitate no discrimination against any people whatsoever. Whether it's the law or not, it doesn't prevent it from being against the FLOSS very basic principles.
I still can't believe that the US law actually applies to SF. The "export restriction" law cannot/shouldn't be applied to products of collective global work and efforts.
What's next, Wikipedia? Slashdot? Google? Why not, they also provide service to people in those countries. And services are products.
Well how about google search and all the American websites, shouldn't they block ban these countries since when someone opens their website some software technology is "transfered" to them (html and javascript code)?
As a Syrian developer who contributed so several open source project, I call this action unnecessary and outrageous.
Sorry, I can’t understand this decision which was taken silently and cowardly by sf.net . I understand that the US law prohibits US companies from exporting their products to the “axis of evil” countries. But what I don’t understand is how sf.net considers the projects they're hosting as US products? It doesn’t make any sense.
SF.net DID NOT create these projects. It just HOSTS them. Most of these projects are got contributions from people around the world including people from these countries. Suddenly they can’t access their own work, because sf.net considers them American products! That’s stupid!
Furthermore, it’s a direct violation of the freedoms of Free Software and section 5 of opensource definition:
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups”
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
Rationale: In order to get the maximum benefit from the process, the maximum diversity of persons and groups should be equally eligible to contribute to open sources. Therefore we forbid any open-source license from locking anybody out of the process.
I hope sf.net reconsider their decision. And at least to stand positively to defend the basic principles of FLOSS.
Slashdot Mirror
the URL is displayed in the status bar, instead of the location bar."
The URL is actually displayed at the bottom of the page in a "pseudo-status-bar" overlaying the page contents. And guess what happens if the background of the page at that area is dark or matching the URL font color.!
Do I see phishing attacks coming soon?
Last time I checked, by default login credentials are sent without encryption over http. Stealing the password is very easy in this case. Everyone should make sure to use https instead. There's an option in the user account to enable https all the time.
http://office365.microsoft.com/
It is quite scary actually. This proves many things.
1. Flesh is not a valid software firewall. We need upgrades.
2. The human body can't fight off computer viruses with our immune system.
3. His body didn't alert him of the virus. No fever or any symptom.
4. Stupidity has no limits.
Great news, and this is a brave thing to do :)
Blindly blocking all SF projects to some people was wrong. I said this before, US export laws should only apply to US products. OpenSource/Free software projects should stay "open" and "free/libre" to everybody. Those who worked hard on these projects, including developers from the banned countries, should have the right to decide whether their projects should be blocked or not.
Some said the law applies to SF just because they host the projects. If the law was strict to this level then the whole internet should be banned to these countries.
What if Americans wanted their intellectual artifacts (code) to reach people in those countries, does the us government have the right to silent them?
Can you remind me when was the last time the US was attacked by a Syrian terrorist? How come Syria sponsors terrorism but Saudi Arabia does not?
Here are some interesting numbers your government doesn't want you to know
These restrictions were initiated on Syria in 2005. I don't know about the other countries, but I'm pretty sure it all started during the Bush administration. So they're not really that old. But anyway, it's time they changed. The censorship Syrians are getting from the US side probably outweighs the Syrian censorship. Think of it, you can't download a lot of free software, no google apps, no sun JRE, no antiviruses, nothing!
I wasn't talking about licenses, I was talking about the principles of Free Software and Open Source Software, which necessitate no discrimination against any people whatsoever. Whether it's the law or not, it doesn't prevent it from being against the FLOSS very basic principles.
I still can't believe that the US law actually applies to SF. The "export restriction" law cannot/shouldn't be applied to products of collective global work and efforts. What's next, Wikipedia? Slashdot? Google? Why not, they also provide service to people in those countries. And services are products.
Well how about google search and all the American websites, shouldn't they block ban these countries since when someone opens their website some software technology is "transfered" to them (html and javascript code)?
And I'm sorry for the typos in my previous comment!
Furthermore, it’s a direct violation of the freedoms of Free Software and section 5 of opensource definition:
I hope sf.net reconsider their decision. And at least to stand positively to defend the basic principles of FLOSS.
To prove the correctness of ClearView, we ran it against itself, and found no bugs, no vulnerabilities,.... nothing at all!
To prove the correctness of ClearView, we ran it against itself, and found no bugs, no vulnerabilities,.... nothing at all!