[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ProgSoc] Servlets

To: progsoc@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au
Subject: Re: [ProgSoc] Servlets
From: Telford <telford@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 10:51:14 +0000
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102030329050.3029-100000@nospam.sutekh.progsoc.uts.edu.au>; from suresh@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au on Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 03:34:12AM +1100
List-Archive: <http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/lists/progsoc/>
List-Id: <progsoc.progsoc.uts.edu.au>
References: <3.0.6.32.20010202095924.0079c8e0@nospam.mail.zeta.org.au> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102030329050.3029-100000@nospam.sutekh.progsoc.uts.edu.au>
Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 21:51:36 +1100
Resent-From: progsoc@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au
Sender: owner-progsoc@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au
User-Agent: Mutt/1.0.1i

On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 03:34:12AM +1100, Suresh Rajagopalan wrote:
> Well there you have it.
> I will quite plainly make this factual statement:
> Servlets are much more secure than CGI.

Your plainly factual statement is made with no supporting evidence.
The physicist, the reverse engineer and the poor bastard debugging
other people's software all have one common requirement -- they
must believe in observation above and beyond all else.

-- 
S1G: 18716740 seconds remaining			- Tel
-
You are subscribed to the progsoc mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a
message containing "unsubscribe" to progsoc-request@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au.
If you are having trouble, ask owner-progsoc@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au for help.

References:
- Re: [ProgSoc] Servlets
  - From: Greg Kopff <gkopff@nospam.powersource.com.au>
- Re: [ProgSoc] Servlets
  - From: Suresh Rajagopalan <suresh@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au>

Prev by Date: Re: [ProgSoc] Servlets
Next by Date: Re: [ProgSoc] Servlets
Prev by thread: Re: [ProgSoc] Servlets
Next by thread: Re: [ProgSoc] Servlets
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread