On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 04:16:10PM +0700, Neta wrote:
> If your conclusion is right. Why so many internet banking used it?
> Do you have any real experiences with your box?
They can get their insurers to cover what they've tested. They've no
incentive to test more browsers to check that they do th
Just a side note here... the bank I am currently using (UMB... United Missouri
Bank).. I am able to use links and lynx (from the console, and links -g) to
access my online bank. The only thing required from both browsers of course is
SSL enabled. I live in the midwest, so this bank fits my needs (w
You just show everyone who really you are
> My conclusion was that you were a lazy prick. It is correct, proven by
> your reply:
> You asked for related papers. You got a pointer. You are a useless
> troll now.
Actually i wanted to know about your expertise about java but you
point me _nothing_
--- Hannah Schroeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 02:18:20AM -0700, Vladislav
> Belogrudov wrote:
> >[...]
>
> >I agree, almost each banking site has it
> >(Citi, Deutsche Bank,...)
>
> Postbank (Germany) works with lynx, pure https and
> forms.
> Though the
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:16:10 +0700, Neta wrote:
>On 7/13/05, Rod.. Whitworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:27:40 +0700, Neta wrote:
>>
>> >Just curious!
>> >Could you show me some related paper that java script completely insecure?
>>
>> Just curious!
>> Could you show me
Hello!
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 02:18:20AM -0700, Vladislav Belogrudov wrote:
>[...]
>I agree, almost each banking site has it
>(Citi, Deutsche Bank,...)
Postbank (Germany) works with lynx, pure https and forms.
Though they depend on the browser identification, with other
browsers they require
> So, you propose relying on the idea that the skills of the malicious
> people are less than the people looking for vulnerabilities? That used
> to be true, but now...we are seeing professionals making money using
> vulnerabilities. I think this is a foolish, very foolish, idea to
> continue to
Bernd Schoeller wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 04:16:10PM +0700, Neta wrote:
>> If your conclusion is right. Why so many internet banking used it?
>> Do you have any real experiences with your box?
>
> Since 9/11, we all should know the difference between an 'abstract
> threat' and a 'concrete t
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 04:16:10PM +0700, Neta wrote:
> If your conclusion is right. Why so many internet banking used it?
> Do you have any real experiences with your box?
Since 9/11, we all should know the difference between an 'abstract
threat' and a 'concrete threat'. JavaScript is an extremel
> you probably confuse JavaScript with Java. Java's sandbox model is much
> more consistent than JavaScript's security policies are. For example,
> have a look at the actual meaning of JavaScript's "same origin policy"
> and you'll see that JavaScript has inherent security problems that can't
> be
--- Neta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/13/05, Rod.. Whitworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:27:40 +0700, Neta wrote:
> >
> > >Just curious!
> > >Could you show me some related paper that java
> script completely insecure?
> >
> > Just curious!
> > Could you show me
Hi,
Neta wrote:
...
If your conclusion is right. Why so many internet banking used it?
Do you have any real experiences with your box?
you probably confuse JavaScript with Java. Java's sandbox model is much
more consistent than JavaScript's security policies are. For example,
have a look at
--On 13 July 2005 16:16 +0700, Neta wrote:
If your conclusion is right. Why so many internet banking used it?
Probably for the same reason loads of them only work with Internet
Explorer - they (mostly) don't care. Some are better though (e.g. smile
in .uk - I don't know whether it's by accid
On 7/13/05, Rod.. Whitworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:27:40 +0700, Neta wrote:
>
> >Just curious!
> >Could you show me some related paper that java script completely insecure?
>
> Just curious!
> Could you show me how Google did not supply you with an answer?
> 166000 hi
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:27:40 +0700, Neta wrote:
>Just curious!
>Could you show me some related paper that java script completely insecure?
Just curious!
Could you show me how Google did not supply you with an answer?
166000 hits
40400 if Internet Explorer excluded.
Lazy boy!
>From the land "dow
Just curious!
Could you show me some related paper that java script completely insecure?
On 7/12/05, Bob Beck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You said java script and secure in the same sentence.. hee hee.
>
> Banks don't give a shit about security. their sites are full
> of garbage
You said java script and secure in the same sentence.. hee hee.
Banks don't give a shit about security. their sites are full
of garbage that make you run crap like that. You'll probably
have to use firefox or internet exploder to use their on-line banking.
hold your nose and smile.
I would like to find the most secure www browser
to use on OpenBSD for online banking. Should support
java script and ssl...
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions no fees. Bid on great items.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
18 matches
Mail list logo
