Hey.. I'll not be looking at your site further. while its a grand idea to try to get people to be more secure, be that as not using IE or what ever, but the problem you have to realize is that people can be very secure using IE and not from IE itself. I run two firewalls one on my machine, one in front of it, I do disable much of the active x options (allowing for updates when needed) and further. In my world I'm safe enough, so the connection to you would be safe enough ... but because you lump everyone using IE as some "unsecured idiot" you've already lost, and Microsoft wins. You block the potential for people to learn from the wealth of knowledge you have, and the chance for them to understand that you speak the truth of MS problems. ... So ... 99% of the world is blocked from seeing your content on first try, and those that really are desperate enough to get to your content would simply launch their other browser, view your content, and leave... hence you've changed nothing but made them jump through some poodle hoop.. ...not this dog... -Robert ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My reply: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: tonemmaps > Date: Jul 19, 2007 8:28 AM > Subject: in re: your "ie" diatribe and use or not to access your web > content > To: wolson@gmail.com > > Hey.. I'll not be looking at your site further. You are more than welcome to do that. > while its a grand idea to try to get people to be more secure, be that as > not using IE or what ever, but the problem you have to realize is that > people can be very secure using IE and not from IE itself. I run two > firewalls one on my machine, one in front of it, I do disable much of the > active x options (allowing for updates when needed) and further. Explain to me how a firewall protects you while using Internet Explorer. Is IE a daemon which accepts incoming connections? I highly doubt you are filtering your HTTP connections outbound with your firewall. More importantly, how do you secure IE against all the vulnerabilities particularly the unpatched ones listed on OSVDB and eEye/ > In my world I'm safe enough, so the connection to you would be safe > enough ... but because you lump everyone using IE as some "unsecured > idiot" > you've already lost, and Microsoft wins. You block the potential for > people > to learn from the wealth of knowledge you have, and the chance for them to > understand that you speak the truth of MS problems. Funny, since this is my server, I don't really see how your definition of safe enough applies. This isn't a game of me vs. Microsoft. Rather this is me defining the conditions upon which content from my server may be downloaded. I block no one from learning from what I provide, instead they must meet the guidelines I set for access. > ... So ... 99% of the world is blocked from seeing your content on first > try, and those that really are desperate enough to get to your content > would > simply launch their other browser, view your content, and leave... hence > you've changed nothing but made them jump through some poodle hoop.. 99% of the world uses IE, funny, but I think your numbers may be a bit off. In fact, they just reported about one out of every five users in Europe uses Firefox instead of IE. Also, I don't care what browser people use to access other sites. That is between those sites and them. > ...not this dog... That is your own choice. Hope you find the material you are looking for elsewhere. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- His reply: that you have no concept of how zone alarm pro works.. tells me you're not worth my time. (and what zone alarm doesn't block in or outbound, as yes, zone alarm does block outbound... I will fill into my hosts file and restricted sites zones in ie) ie is the default install for windows (pull out your windows cd's before microsoft made any change to the latest revisions to make the EU happy), everyone that has windows has IE and until some OEM's decided to forcibly install other browsers prior to sending a system to a user, that user HAD TO USE ie to get that other browser (except those rare conditions where someone would actually use other access methods, ftp, aol install disk, etc, all of which would be a vastly smaller number than someone using the "evil one's" browser to get their browser of choice) you want to argue statistics, 1 in 5 is 20% ... and again, those 20% still have components of IE on their computer, and most likely have used it without direct assertion to do so. (outlook, word, or any of the microsoft office suite) your concept of directing people that already don't have clue's (meaning don't already know anything about security and the problems they will have if they don't keep their computer secure) does nothing to educate, does nothing to really pull them over from the dark side, nor validate making the change or even running dual browsers. You've obviously not been involved in the real world, where business critical time is involved, where companies are stupid enough not to have checked their HTML code against other browsers and thus, anyone not accessing with IE would be unable to perform their job (verizon's back end for DSL is one such case most recently in my mind). Being that, a requirement for some places to peform their daily work, again, your thoughts on not using IE pale by comparison and are thus, useless in the world. Get the companies on board with proper scripting, in fact while you're at it how about getting MICROSOFT on board with plain html, where microsoft can take hello world and turn it into 90+ lines of tags in Word's version of HTML, or still 30 to 60 lines inside an HTML email from Outlook... get microsoft to change their stupidity, and then you have room to change the world... beyond that.. Don't bother emailing me again. -R --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My reply: > that you have no concept of how zone alarm pro works.. tells me you're not > worth my time. (and what zone alarm doesn't block in or outbound, as yes, > zone alarm does block outbound... I will fill into my hosts file and > restricted sites zones in ie) Maybe you would care to enlighten me since you are obviously so much more versed in securing a computer than I. Tell what does Zone Alarm do other than possibly block connections to sites you haven't listed as approved? Does it filter content like an application level firewall? Does it somehow magically know to prevent exploits run on sites which you stated you want to visit? Please do enlighten me? > ie is the default install for windows (pull out your windows cd's before > microsoft made any change to the latest revisions to make the EU happy), > everyone that has windows has IE and until some OEM's decided to forcibly > install other browsers prior to sending a system to a user, that user > HAD TO > USE ie to get that other browser (except those rare conditions where > someone > would actually use other access methods, ftp, aol install disk, etc, all of > which would be a vastly smaller number than someone using the "evil one's" > browser to get their browser of choice) Once again, not my problem how they get it. If people care enough to bitch to MS regarding the level of browser choices they will. I simply state once again, my content, my rules. > you want to argue statistics, 1 in 5 is 20% ... and again, those 20% still > have components of IE on their computer, and most likely have used it > without direct assertion to do so. (outlook, word, or any of the microsoft > office suite) I never stated 1 in five Windows users are running Firefox, I stated one in five users period are running Firefox. > your concept of directing people that already don't have clue's (meaning > don't already know anything about security and the problems they will have > if they don't keep their computer secure) does nothing to educate, does > nothing to really pull them over from the dark side, nor validate making > the > change or even running dual browsers. Once again, you purposefully misunderstand the concept. My purpose isn't to educate, my purpose is to state quite clearly and precisely why you can't access my content with IE. I couldn't give a smaller shit if I squeezed my sphincter for days whether you or anyone else switches. Rather I simply care if you are able to access my content with IE. > You've obviously not been involved in the real world, where business > critical time is involved, where companies are stupid enough not to have > checked their HTML code against other browsers and thus, anyone not > accessing with IE would be unable to perform their job (verizon's back end > for DSL is one such case most recently in my mind). Really and do you bitch at Verizon for requiring a particular browser? Then why are you bitching at me when I state a particular browser is not allowed? How about the fact that Verizon by requiring IE dooms an entire class of computer users (Mac) to use an insecure unsupported version of IE to access a resource for which they paid? However once again, I don't give a damn what Verizon and other companies do regarding their content. If their lack of browser choice bothers me enough, I fail to use them and send my reasons in a clear letter to their management. I don't rant like some whiny, petulant child. I state "To whom it may concern, Your failure to support alternative browsers for site, http://www.domain.xyz has caused me to take my business to your competitor X." > Being that, a requirement for some places to peform their daily work, > again, > your thoughts on not using IE pale by comparison and are thus, useless in > the world. Get the companies on board with proper scripting, in fact while > you're at it how about getting MICROSOFT on board with plain html, where > microsoft can take hello > world and turn it into 90+ lines of tags in > Word's version of HTML, or still 30 to 60 lines inside an HTML email from > Outlook... > > get microsoft to change their stupidity, and then you have room to change > the world... beyond that.. Don't bother emailing me again. I don't have to get Microsoft to change anything, rather I merely need to continue to encourage people that there are better ways to do business. I do it by simply restricting access to the pieces I control "I am a libertarian before anything else. I am perfectly content with Microsoft selling inferior software, since the market clearly dictates this is something the public wants. However it is not something I want. So I do everything in my power to discourage IE's use. Note, I am not attempting to get Microsoft banned by government interference from selling Internet Explorer, I am trying to convince enough people to shift the market away from Internet Explorer. This may be a hard concept for most people to understand, but I believe that this is the proper way." Let me see if I get this right, you go off on your little incoherent rant and then I am not allowed to email you. This one is going on the Attrition's Going Postal page. Congratulations you are first participant. I will continue to email you as you initiated this conversation. The fact you don't want to play any more is none of my problem.