[opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?

[Gareth Nelson]

Yes, but most viewers have decent legit developers who won't put that
stuff on the login page.

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Harold Brown <labrat.hb at gmail.com> wrote:
> What I find interesting is that people are neglecting to realize that
> ANY viewer, even a LL viewer could have been used to do the same thing
> by changing the WEBPAGE the login screen pointed to.  Or for that
> matter distributing a object using the new Media functions to load a
> webpage with the exact same iframe set.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 8:03 AM, David M Chess <chess at us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Could we move all this stuff to a new "emeraldgate" list, or something?
>>
>> That I could then carefully not subscribe to?
>>
>> __
>> _______________________________________________
>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
>> privileges
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
>



-- 
“Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” -
Printcrime by Cory Doctrow

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html