Re: "Going after Netscape"

[shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <199509231914.MAA01326@infinity.c2.org>, sameer@c2.org (sameer)
wrote:

>> So, keep on "attacking" Netscape (kudos to Ray, by the way, though I've
>> seen Netscape bomb on certain sites, as with the Cypherpunks archive site,
>> as several of us noted a few months ago...probably a different problem, but
>> indicative that Netscape can be corrupted). But let's be careful not to
>> convey any flavor of this being a vendetta.
>
>        I agree. The goal is not to kill Netscape but to make the net
>secure.

Absolutely. We aren't on a vendetta. We want to make the net secure for
privacy. If hacking a Netscape server will help that goal, surely
Netsape's own would be the most appropriate server to try, since it will
generate the largest exposure in the press and thereby the strongest
motivation for Netscape to fix the hole.

- -- 
- -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com>
   PGP encrypted mail preferred.
- ---
[This message has been signed by an auto-signing service.  A valid signature
means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the
signature and forwarded.]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Gratis auto-signing service

iQBFAwUBMGRoHyoZzwIn1bdtAQHJCgF9FbuTP1VBbzGJANFX48hvje4V7pzhyEaQ
ItXGdXHCPbxjKbQ0bLApkt4yTtHJREMk
=wEyv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----