Comments on: Why I’ll Never Use Outlook http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/ It crossed my mind that you might consider that a possibility... Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:36:37 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: spivey http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/comment-page-1/#comment-98 spivey Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/#comment-98 um... that's not so good. um… that’s not so good.

]]> By: Andy http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/comment-page-1/#comment-99 Andy Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/#comment-99 Brilliant and EVIL! Brilliant and EVIL!

]]> By: leonard http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/comment-page-1/#comment-100 leonard Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/#comment-100 watch out andre! >;) watch out andre! >;)

]]> By: Greg Reinacker http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/comment-page-1/#comment-101 Greg Reinacker Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/#comment-101 I have posted comments related to NewsGator and this issue at <a href="http://www.newsgator.com/news/archive.aspx?post=3.">http://www.newsgator.com/news/archive.aspx?post=3.</a> I have posted comments related to NewsGator and this issue at http://www.newsgator.com/news/archive.aspx?post=3.

]]> By: Bill Kearney http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/comment-page-1/#comment-102 Bill Kearney Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/#comment-102 This is not a new issue. It's been raised many times in the past. Putting scripting inside RSS items it evil. Anything that handles RSS should attempt to neuter said scripts if it finds it. This is an extra, and possibly tedious, step but one that cannot be reasonably argued against. The one argument being a customized channel that has legitimate intentions. This isn't an unreasonable idea. But it seems like it'd be something that required a per-feed preference setting of some kind that allowed that channel to get away with that sort of stuff. This opens the can of worms about digitally signed scripts and embedded code. If a feed intended to have such wonderful things done that it required scripting then it aught then take the bigger step up to using PKI. An ugly analogy, perhaps, is if you want promiscuity then bring protection. This is not a new issue. It’s been raised many times in the past. Putting scripting inside RSS items it evil. Anything that handles RSS should attempt to neuter said scripts if it finds it. This is an extra, and possibly tedious, step but one that cannot be reasonably argued against. The one argument being a customized channel that has legitimate intentions. This isn’t an unreasonable idea. But it seems like it’d be something that required a per-feed preference setting of some kind that allowed that channel to get away with that sort of stuff.

This opens the can of worms about digitally signed scripts and embedded code. If a feed intended to have such wonderful things done that it required scripting then it aught then take the bigger step up to using PKI. An ugly analogy, perhaps, is if you want promiscuity then bring protection.

]]> By: andy http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/comment-page-1/#comment-103 andy Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.fibiger.org/2003/02/147/#comment-103 Still, the problem seems to me to rest solely with outlook. Why should any 'foreign' script be allowed to perform operations like reading the address book or sending email without the user's permission. Seems to me that applying some logical security ideas in the development of Outlook would save everyone a lot of time and effort. I understand MS wants there to be the possibility of 'active content', but that is an issue web browsers have been dealing with for years. Why not use some of the same frameworks in Outlook? Still, the problem seems to me to rest solely with outlook. Why should any ‘foreign’ script be allowed to perform operations like reading the address book or sending email without the user’s permission.

Seems to me that applying some logical security ideas in the development of Outlook would save everyone a lot of time and effort. I understand MS wants there to be the possibility of ‘active content’, but that is an issue web browsers have been dealing with for years. Why not use some of the same frameworks in Outlook?

]]>