Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ

quote:

---

Originally posted by markee
Well it will still stop any current ones rather than just making an EXTREMELY easy method of opening it all back up again.  It means that the virus makers have to get another version out and then when it happens we can notify the likes of the people from tinyURL or whatever and get them to remove the link as well as report the person to their ISP as they will have the IP address that was used.

---

do you know how long it takes to compile and distribute a new version of a virus? considering every virus these days is typically a botnet client, all the author would have to do is type ".download newpath" or related. you're really not making any point at all.

lets ban markee, because there's a one in a million chance that his msghelp.net account will be compromised some time in the future and have a virii writer post a link to a virus on the forums. in another one in a million chance one or two people might actually run it and be infected.

preemptive censorship owns

---

Firat of all that makes no sense because anyone can join the forums, it is not like it is invite only.  Secondly, it is FAR more likely that a virus will get linked to you than one in a million I do believe.  I know for a fact that I have had my friends get infected by at least 4 different attacks through messenger this year alone (and we are only just in August remember).  I'm not saying that all .info domains have viruses but the reasoning behind censoring them in the beginning was clear and well thought IMHO, however I do believe there should be some kind of alert to the message not being sent rather than just making a method to bypass the security feature.  By making and distributing scripts (even just the code) we are opening up a lot of potential problems, maybe we have shown that the security system that the Messenger team has put into place has loop-holes, but we should report it rather than exploit it.

I do realise that links from friends aren't normally harmful, but if we have sufficient warning about it and work around them in safe ways then it should all be fine and make the little bit of extra effort worth it.

I do realise it is more convenient not to have these security measures, but isn't it more convenient to just use through stuff into the normal, general waste rather than recycling, or take a car rather than walking to the corner store for the milk and paper?  These are just some of the things that we are realising we should do in the way of sacrifices so that everyone can enjoy their time, now and in the future.

"I'm not saying that all .info domains have viruses"

"the reasoning behind censoring them in the beginning was clear and well thought IMHO"

cheers to contradiction



edit: and i'm not even getting IN to how fucking awful that third paragraph is. THEY'RE PAID DEVELOPERS. your metaphor was absolutely useless.

Hey guys

If you need to argue this bad I think you guys should do it on private messages.

My take is that if someone asks for a script to avoid a feature...this is the right place to ask for it. Or to show his/her work in a script.

Other than that our moral judgements even though could be very interesting are most certainly out of place.

Just my two cents.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Deco
Hey guys

If you need to argue this bad I think you guys should do it on private messages.

My take is that if someone asks for a script to avoid a feature...this is the right place to ask for it. Or to show his/her work in a script.

Other than that our moral judgements even though could be very interesting are most certainly out of place.

Just my two cents.

---

pot, kettle.

I think if people are worried about it bypassing "security measures", the script should be changed so that it alerts users that the messages hasn't been sent rather than sending the original message.

Ok,

So do both sides need to have the script installed?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steel Froggy
Ok,

So do both sides need to have the script installed?

---

no, read the code

EDIT:

NVM. I'm a moron.