IE 6,7,8

[Peter Foldes]

All versions of IE affected. This Security Released was published today Nov 3

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec...y/2458511.mspx

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

[AJRS]

Peter Foldes wrote:
> All versions of IE affected. This Security Released was published today
> Nov 3
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec...y/2458511.mspx
>

Very interesting information but I'm unclear why you posted it here.

I happened across a post recently which stated .......

"I am still using IE6 and I have no interest in going to IE 7, 8, or 9.
Mine is hardened to the max and plus and I am extremely happy with it.
Besides I am not able to do what I need to with any of the newer
versions. They (MS) took out all the codes from the newer ones that is
needed for my work"

IE6

<q/p>

This version of Internet Explorer is widely derided for its security
issues and lack of support for modern web standards, making frequent
appearances in "worst tech products of all time" lists, with some
publications labeling it as the "least secure software on the planet."

<p>

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_6


Can you, or anyone else, suggest what type of work might require the use
of a browser with so many flaws?

WHY could another, safer, browser not be used for such work?

TIA

[David H. Lipman]

From: "AJRS" <AJRS@nospam.invalid>

| Peter Foldes wrote:
>> All versions of IE affected. This Security Released was published today
>> Nov 3

>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec...y/2458511.mspx


| Very interesting information but I'm unclear why you posted it here.

< snip >

Because of its vulnerability/exploitation vector factor.

--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

[AJRS]

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "AJRS"<AJRS@nospam.invalid>
>
> | Peter Foldes wrote:
>>> All versions of IE affected. This Security Released was published today
>>> Nov 3
>
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec...y/2458511.mspx
>
>
> | Very interesting information but I'm unclear why you posted it here.
>
> < snip>
>
> Because of its vulnerability/exploitation vector factor.
>

Of course.

What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many flaws?

WHY couldn't another, safer, browser be used for such work?

[Peter Foldes]

AJRS A.K.A BD

BD (David Brooks) using another posting name

You are using another posting name yet again. You are a Troll and an all around
idiot

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect


"AJRS" <AJRS@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:ib38a8$noo$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> David H. Lipman wrote:
>> From: "AJRS"<AJRS@nospam.invalid>
>>
>> | Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>> All versions of IE affected. This Security Released was published today
>>>> Nov 3
>>
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sec...y/2458511.mspx
>>
>>
>> | Very interesting information but I'm unclear why you posted it here.
>>
>> < snip>
>>
>> Because of its vulnerability/exploitation vector factor.
>>
>
> Of course.
>
> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many flaws?
>
> WHY couldn't another, safer, browser be used for such work?

[BoaterDave]

On Nov 6, 11:15*am, "Peter Foldes" <ok...@hotmail.com>

........ failed to answer a straight-forward question, which was:-

What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
flaws?

WHY couldn't another, safer, browser be used for such work?

Surely, if anyone would know the answer, it's you Mr Foldes!

Please share.

BD

[Mike Easter]

BoaterDave wrote:

> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
> flaws?

This is not a useful question, because it is based on the 'inner'
thoughts and unknown configuration or requirements of this cited person

> "I am still using IE6 and I have no interest in going to IE 7, 8, or
> 9. Mine is hardened to the max and plus and I am extremely happy with
> it. Besides I am not able to do what I need to with any of the newer
> versions. They (MS) took out all the codes from the newer ones that
> is needed for my work"

You can consider this snip from the wiki, which article you have already
cited, so you must be familiar

> IE6 remained more popular than its successor in business use for more
> than a year after IE7 came out.[19] A DailyTech article noted, "A
> Survey found 55.2% of companies still use IE 6 as of December 2007",
> while "IE 7 only has a 23.4 percent adoption rate".[19] - Net
> Applications estimated IE6 market share at almost 39% for September,
> 2008.[20] According to the same source, IE7 users migrate faster to
> IE8 than users of its predecessor IE6 does. This led to IE6 once
> again becoming the most widely used browser version. During the
> summer and fall of 2009, 8 years after its introduction, IE6 still
> held the top spot in terms of browser marketshare.[21]

Consequently, one can assume that many web interfaces may have been more
compatible with IE6 than IE7 and (still) compatible with IE6 and not
other browsers - causing the person who we can't 'fault' or question
because they aren't here - to find his other options unsatisfactory.
Then, when IE8 came out, it was initially less compatible (with those
older cites) than IE7, causing a 'hardening' of his opinions and conviction.

In my opinion -1- if used very carefully, one could use IE6, but it is
dangerous -2- if used judiciously, one can use Fx almost any place you
need to especially as more and more sites became compatible as Fx gained
share -3- by this late date, the same sites which the unknown target IE6
user couldn't use anything else, can now accommodate all kinds of IE and
other browsers, so the original premise is almost entirely gone.

.... which is what makes your question not useful and thus a waste of time.


--
Mike Easter

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Mike Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid>

| BoaterDave wrote:

>> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
>> flaws?

| This is not a useful question, because it is based on the 'inner'
| thoughts and unknown configuration or requirements of this cited person

Like compatibility issues.

My org. bars the use of IE8 due to compatibility and compliance issues.

--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

[Mike Easter]

David H. Lipman wrote:
> "Mike Easter"
>
> | BoaterDave wrote:
>
>>> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
>>> flaws?
>
> | This is not a useful question, because it is based on the 'inner'
> | thoughts and unknown configuration or requirements of this cited person
>
> Like compatibility issues.
>
> My org. bars the use of IE8 due to compatibility and compliance issues.

I'm not much of an IE user, but...

.... what about using IE8's Compatibility Mode function? That seems to be
a compatibility advantage of IE8 over IE7.

That is, I don't know how it works with your org. - whether 'barring'
means 'I don't care if you can make it work or not, you are not allowed
to use it IE8 here and you are not in charge of the admin of the
computer (install/update to IE8) you use while in our org.'

Previously I think there was a section in the wikipedia in which it
explained how IE8 was less compatible than IE7, but I can't find that
section now, so it must have been edited away. Could that be because of
compatibility mode advantages?

I think I'll look in the discussion section some more for it - the
missing compatibility issue - so far no go.


--
Mike Easter

[~BD~]

Mike Easter wrote:
> BoaterDave wrote:
>
>> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
>> flaws?

[....]

> In my opinion -1- if used very carefully, one could use IE6, but it is
> dangerous -2- if used judiciously, one can use Fx almost any place you
> need to especially as more and more sites became compatible as Fx gained
> share -3- by this late date, the same sites which the unknown target IE6
> user couldn't use anything else, can now accommodate all kinds of IE and
> other browsers, so the original premise is almost entirely gone.
>
> ... which is what makes your question not useful and thus a waste of time.


Have a WAG - What type of work might require the exclusive use of IE6
specifically?

Methinks the OP knows the answer, even if you don't Mike!