Signed Applets

darryl (darryl@worldchat.com)
Mon, 14 Apr 1997 18:28:03 -0400

Message-Id: <199704142228.SAA24520@barb.worldchat.com>
From: "darryl" <darryl@worldchat.com>
To: <java-security@web2.javasoft.com>
Subject: Signed Applets
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 18:28:03 -0400

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01BC4901.972AF0E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sounds like you guys there at Sun have a serious foot in mouth problem. =
How can you condem a technology such as ActiveX and at the same time =
work on enabling the same technology into Java? Your sandbox is no =
longer going to be secure as Sun likes to boast. What, with illegaly =
signed applets running around the net and reaking havoc on unsuspecting =
pc's. Sun must be starting to realize that microsoft offers a lot more =
flexibility when desinging web apps with explorer due to ActiveX =
technology than does netscape or sun Java. =20
I really can't believe it. Pay a developer a whole wack of money to =
develop an ActiveX control that isn't even signed and then demonstrate =
the security risks it carries by demonstrating it (disregarding the =
warnings that the control is not signed and shouldn't be used) and =
project a false sense of fear into net users. =20
You can always tell when one company feels it is behind the other and =
they really know it-and they fear it-so much that they have to go to =
great lenghts to nock the other company. =20
I used to prefer netscape and sun's version of java, but microsoft has =
so much more to offer. Unfortuneately, I am stuck developing pages for =
netscape viewing because people are caught up in the crap and media =
manipulation you expouse there at Sun, and have not switched over yet. =
Only time will fix that.
Darryl Bennett

------=_NextPart_000_01BC4901.972AF0E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML 3.2//EN">

Sounds like you guys there at Sun have a = serious foot=20 in mouth problem. How can you condem a technology such as ActiveX and = at the=20 same time work on enabling the same technology into Java? Your sandbox = is no=20 longer going to be secure as Sun likes to boast. What, with illegaly = signed=20 applets running around the net and reaking havoc on unsuspecting pc's. = Sun must=20 be starting to realize that microsoft offers a lot more flexibility when = desinging web apps with explorer due to ActiveX technology than does = netscape or=20 sun Java.

I really can't believe it. Pay a = developer a whole=20 wack of money to develop an ActiveX control that isn't even signed and = then=20 demonstrate the security risks it carries by demonstrating it = (disregarding the=20 warnings that the control is not signed and shouldn't be used) and = project a=20 false sense of fear into net users.

You can always tell when one company = feels it is=20 behind the other and they really know it-and they fear it-so much that = they have=20 to go to great lenghts to nock the other company.

I used to prefer netscape and sun's = version of java,=20 but microsoft has so much more to offer. Unfortuneately, I am stuck = developing=20 pages for netscape viewing because people are caught up in the crap and = media=20 manipulation you expouse there at Sun, and have not switched over yet. = Only=20 time will fix that.

Darryl Bennett

------=_NextPart_000_01BC4901.972AF0E0--