Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week

[url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]

I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
Frank

"Frank" <fb@spamm.nrz> wrote in message
news:OIVAT54MIHA.5224@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>
> [url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>
> I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
> attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
> Frank[/color]

score:

Microsoft - 10,000,000
Firefox - 1

point taken

[..."wonds" <- LOL]

On Nov 30, 3:19 pm, Frank <f...@spamm.nrz> wrote:[color=blue]
> Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>
> [url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBas[/url]...
>
> I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
> attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
> Frank[/color]

Hey, my company is looking for a windows sysadmin.

Only needs to have 3 fingers on one hand.

Just enough to hit the crtl-alt-delete keys about once an hour.

The rest of the time you can stare at the BSOD.

Later,

Andy C.(never #)

"Frank" <fb@spamm.nrz> wrote in message
news:OIVAT54MIHA.5224@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>
> [url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>
> I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
> attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
> Frank[/color]

You know that problem would only affect about 100 users!!!!

Frank <fb@spamm.nrz> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>
>[url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>
>I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
>attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL![/color]

When a vulnerability is found in Firefox, it's fixed within a couple
of days. Then your Firefox browser will find and install the upgrade
automatically. When an IE vulnerability is found, you might get a
patch the next "patch Tuesday". Or they might put it off for while...

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(Shell/User)
[email]Slattery_T@bls.gov[/email]
[url]http://members.cox.net/slatteryt[/url]

Frank wrote:[color=blue]
> Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>
> [url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>
>
> I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
> attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
> Frank[/color]
If you would have bothered to read the article, you would have
discovered that it is a rendering issue, not a security issue.
"A bug in rendering "canvas" HTML elements worked its way into Firefox
2.0.0.10, the edition Mozilla released Monday to fix six other
vulnerabilities. Canvas elements, which were first used by Apple Inc. in
its Safari browser, let Web site designers dynamically render bitmap
images in HTML. Firefox, Safari and Opera support Canvas natively;
Microsoft Corp.'s Internet Explorer does so with a plug-in.
All editions of Firefox 2.0.0.10 -- for Windows, Mac OS X and Linux --
break pages that include the Canvas element, and cripple at least two
Firefox extensions, FoxSaver and Fotofox."

--
norm

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:19:33 -0800, Frank wrote:
[color=blue]
> Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>
> [url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>
> I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
> attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
> Frank[/color]

Whereas MS simply ignores the problem for several months before they fix
anything.

ray wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:19:33 -0800, Frank wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>>
>>[url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>>
>>I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
>>attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
>>Frank[/color]
>
>
> Whereas MS simply ignores the problem for several months before they fix
> anything.
>[/color]

Don't you wish....
Frank

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:11:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
[color=blue]
> ray wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:19:33 -0800, Frank wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>>>
>>>[url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>>>
>>>I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
>>>attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
>>>Frank[/color]
>>
>>
>> Whereas MS simply ignores the problem for several months before they fix
>> anything.
>>[/color]
>
> Don't you wish....
> Frank[/color]

Wish what? That MS would get their collective butts in gear and send out
some fixes in under six months? YES!

dzomlija wrote:[color=blue]
> norm;530545 Wrote:[color=green]
>> Frank wrote:
>> If you would have bothered to read the article, you would have
>> discovered that it is a rendering issue, not a security issue.
>> "A bug in rendering "canvas" HTML elements worked its way into Firefox
>> 2.0.0.10, the edition Mozilla released Monday to fix six other
>> vulnerabilities. Canvas elements, which were first used by Apple Inc.
>> in
>> its Safari browser, let Web site designers dynamically render bitmap
>> images in HTML. Firefox, Safari and Opera support Canvas natively;
>> Microsoft Corp.'s Internet Explorer does so with a plug-in.
>> All editions of Firefox 2.0.0.10 -- for Windows, Mac OS X and Linux --
>> break pages that include the Canvas element, and cripple at least two
>> Firefox extensions, FoxSaver and Fotofox."
>>
>> --
>> norm[/color]
>
> Not to diss you or anything, but had you checked your own post, you'd
> have seen than FireFox 2.0.0.10 was released
> "_to_fix_six_other_vulnerabilities_". Not the Canvas issue.
> Vulnerabilities.[/color]
I did see that. The article, however, is about the canvass regression,
and upon a second reading, I believe that is the only issue that the
article addresses, with no relation to the original vulnerabilities,
which were mentioned only in passing. I took frank's post as a poke at
the canvas regression issue, not the other six vulnerabilities. If I
erred, so be it.[color=blue]
>
> And just to be certain, could you point me in the direction of a
> website that uses this "dynamic rendering of bitmaps using HTML" so that
> I can check if IE 7 requires a plugin or not. My work requires me to be
> almost constantly on the web, and I've yet to encounter anything
> remotely like that, and I go to literally 100's of sites every day...
>
>[/color]
I cannot provide any site or info for you, sorry.

--
norm

ray wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:11:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>ray wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:19:33 -0800, Frank wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>>>>
>>>>[url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>>>>
>>>>I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
>>>>attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
>>>>Frank
>>>
>>>
>>>Whereas MS simply ignores the problem for several months before they fix
>>>anything.
>>>[/color]
>>
>>Don't you wish....
>>Frank[/color]
>
>
> Wish what? That MS would get their collective butts in gear and send out
> some fixes in under six months? YES!
>[/color]

Why? Oh please, drop the charade. I presume from your postings that you
don't use, nor do you give a rat's arse about anything MS.
If you did, you'd know MS generally issues fixes and updates as needed
on a regular basis...as if that mattered to you.
Frank

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:34:39 -0800, Frank wrote:
[color=blue]
> ray wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:11:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>ray wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:19:33 -0800, Frank wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>>>>>
>>>>>[url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>>>>>
>>>>>I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
>>>>>attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
>>>>>Frank
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Whereas MS simply ignores the problem for several months before they fix
>>>>anything.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Don't you wish....
>>>Frank[/color]
>>
>>
>> Wish what? That MS would get their collective butts in gear and send out
>> some fixes in under six months? YES!
>>[/color]
>
> Why? Oh please, drop the charade. I presume from your postings that you
> don't use, nor do you give a rat's arse about anything MS.
> If you did, you'd know MS generally issues fixes and updates as needed
> on a regular basis...as if that mattered to you.
> Frank[/color]

I care because I like to see folks making maximum use from their computers
- and quite frankly (pun intended) I don't give a rat's ass what they use
- that is their decision. I know that MS "generally issues fixes and
updates" after everyone in the world knows about them and has been
exploiting them for several months - that's why it's the most unsecure OS
available.

ray wrote:[color=blue]
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:34:39 -0800, Frank wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>ray wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:11:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>ray wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:19:33 -0800, Frank wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Mozilla scrambles to patch Firefox for second time this week
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[url]http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9049998&intsrc=hm_list[/url]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I sure am glad that open sores software is never vulnerable to any
>>>>>>attacks...yeah...hahaha...LOL!
>>>>>>Frank
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Whereas MS simply ignores the problem for several months before they fix
>>>>>anything.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Don't you wish....
>>>>Frank
>>>
>>>
>>>Wish what? That MS would get their collective butts in gear and send out
>>>some fixes in under six months? YES!
>>>[/color]
>>
>>Why? Oh please, drop the charade. I presume from your postings that you
>>don't use, nor do you give a rat's arse about anything MS.
>>If you did, you'd know MS generally issues fixes and updates as needed
>>on a regular basis...as if that mattered to you.
>>Frank[/color]
>
>
> I care because I like to see folks making maximum use from their computers
> - and quite frankly (pun intended) I don't give a rat's ass what they use
> - that is their decision. I know that MS "generally issues fixes and
> updates" after everyone in the world knows about them and has been
> exploiting them for several months - that's why it's the most unsecure OS
> available.
>[/color]

Frankly (yep!), that is just about the most insincere and untrue (false)
statement I've heard in the last 5 mins and you proly know that to be true.
Frank