If running JAVA JDK JRE [see recent JAVA and Flash posted warning]and Office 2002 and above

Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

"I'm not against women. Not often enough, anyway." - Groucho Marx

In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

"I'm not against women. Not often enough, anyway." - Groucho Marx

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)

Is that a real question or is this just another walk down some lane you
have in mind...
How about you think about JAVA [which is its own environment] then
think about whether the vulnerabilities/issues might be related to the
version itself, for the most part. Since there are no elevation of
privileges necessary in 9X, not much that would need overcome by a hack
or code or otherwise, would there be.

As for the Office vulnerabilities: what do you think...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)

Is that a real question or is this just another walk down some lane you
have in mind...
How about you think about JAVA [which is its own environment] then
think about whether the vulnerabilities/issues might be related to the
version itself, for the most part. Since there are no elevation of
privileges necessary in 9X, not much that would need overcome by a hack
or code or otherwise, would there be.

As for the Office vulnerabilities: what do you think...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

In message , MEB
writes:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)

Is that a real question or is this just another walk down some lane you
have in mind...

Genuine, for others' benefit ...

How about you think about JAVA [which is its own environment] then
think about whether the vulnerabilities/issues might be related to the
version itself, for the most part. Since there are no elevation of

Not having your experience, I wouldn't get very far with that kind of
thinking (-:. I could just ask you do these vulnerabilities affect 98 or
not, but I know you want us to do some of the thinking, so am trying to
figure out how: first you told me to "review" it/them, now you're
telling me to "think about" them - but I don't know how.

privileges necessary in 9X, not much that would need overcome by a hack
or code or otherwise, would there be.

I shouldn't say this since I write convoluted sentences too, so it's
pots and kettles, but that last sentence is a bit Yoda-like ...

As for the Office vulnerabilities: what do you think...

I'd be most surprised if Office isn't riddled with them. (Not that it's
bad, it's just big, and popular.) But how would I - or an "innocent"
98-user - know if the specific new ones mentioned in the report you
lined to, affect it under 98? And, what would I/he do about it if they
do?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

"I'm not against women. Not often enough, anyway." - Groucho Marx

In message , MEB
writes:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)

Is that a real question or is this just another walk down some lane you
have in mind...

Genuine, for others' benefit ...

How about you think about JAVA [which is its own environment] then
think about whether the vulnerabilities/issues might be related to the
version itself, for the most part. Since there are no elevation of

Not having your experience, I wouldn't get very far with that kind of
thinking (-:. I could just ask you do these vulnerabilities affect 98 or
not, but I know you want us to do some of the thinking, so am trying to
figure out how: first you told me to "review" it/them, now you're
telling me to "think about" them - but I don't know how.

privileges necessary in 9X, not much that would need overcome by a hack
or code or otherwise, would there be.

I shouldn't say this since I write convoluted sentences too, so it's
pots and kettles, but that last sentence is a bit Yoda-like ...

As for the Office vulnerabilities: what do you think...

I'd be most surprised if Office isn't riddled with them. (Not that it's
bad, it's just big, and popular.) But how would I - or an "innocent"
98-user - know if the specific new ones mentioned in the report you
lined to, affect it under 98? And, what would I/he do about it if they
do?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

"I'm not against women. Not often enough, anyway." - Groucho Marx

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)

Is that a real question or is this just another walk down some lane you
have in mind...

Genuine, for others' benefit ...

How about you think about JAVA [which is its own environment] then
think about whether the vulnerabilities/issues might be related to the
version itself, for the most part. Since there are no elevation of

Not having your experience, I wouldn't get very far with that kind of
thinking (-:. I could just ask you do these vulnerabilities affect 98 or
not, but I know you want us to do some of the thinking, so am trying to
figure out how: first you told me to "review" it/them, now you're
telling me to "think about" them - but I don't know how.

I told you, it is an environment, as in, running with little control in
*whatever OS it is installed in*. The vulnerabilities exist IN IT. Did
you see a mention for any OS, NO, it was for specific *JAVA*
versions/installations AS DEFINED.

So what the heck do you need to know.. or rather supposedly, since this
IS just another of your recent postings styles in this group..
Who's next, 98 Guy or one of the others with nothing better to do...
which worthless entity will pop-in now...


privileges necessary in 9X, not much that would need overcome by a hack
or code or otherwise, would there be.

I shouldn't say this since I write convoluted sentences too, so it's
pots and kettles, but that last sentence is a bit Yoda-like ...

Cut the crap, I'm not playing your games anymore... if you can't
understand anything then what the frig are you posting for and about...
you should be looking at the materials which explain it all to you...


As for the Office vulnerabilities: what do you think...

I'd be most surprised if Office isn't riddled with them. (Not that it's
bad, it's just big, and popular.) But how would I - or an "innocent"
98-user - know if the specific new ones mentioned in the report you
lined to, affect it under 98? And, what would I/he do about it if they do?

Gee, how about looking at the links *within* the vulnerability
reports,,, might be a REAL good place to start...
OR you can rattle on under this subject heading for awhile...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)

Is that a real question or is this just another walk down some lane you
have in mind...

Genuine, for others' benefit ...

How about you think about JAVA [which is its own environment] then
think about whether the vulnerabilities/issues might be related to the
version itself, for the most part. Since there are no elevation of

Not having your experience, I wouldn't get very far with that kind of
thinking (-:. I could just ask you do these vulnerabilities affect 98 or
not, but I know you want us to do some of the thinking, so am trying to
figure out how: first you told me to "review" it/them, now you're
telling me to "think about" them - but I don't know how.

I told you, it is an environment, as in, running with little control in
*whatever OS it is installed in*. The vulnerabilities exist IN IT. Did
you see a mention for any OS, NO, it was for specific *JAVA*
versions/installations AS DEFINED.

So what the heck do you need to know.. or rather supposedly, since this
IS just another of your recent postings styles in this group..
Who's next, 98 Guy or one of the others with nothing better to do...
which worthless entity will pop-in now...


privileges necessary in 9X, not much that would need overcome by a hack
or code or otherwise, would there be.

I shouldn't say this since I write convoluted sentences too, so it's
pots and kettles, but that last sentence is a bit Yoda-like ...

Cut the crap, I'm not playing your games anymore... if you can't
understand anything then what the frig are you posting for and about...
you should be looking at the materials which explain it all to you...


As for the Office vulnerabilities: what do you think...

I'd be most surprised if Office isn't riddled with them. (Not that it's
bad, it's just big, and popular.) But how would I - or an "innocent"
98-user - know if the specific new ones mentioned in the report you
lined to, affect it under 98? And, what would I/he do about it if they do?

Gee, how about looking at the links *within* the vulnerability
reports,,, might be a REAL good place to start...
OR you can rattle on under this subject heading for awhile...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

In message , MEB
writes:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , MEB
writes:
Some new/additional vulnerabilities have been defined which may be of
interest should you be running JAVA and Office applications [2002 - up]
[Excel, Word, other]. It is recommended to review these potential
issues, and seek updates or fixes if/when available.

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB09-320.html

A well-intentioned warning.

How would a '98 user do the reviewing, i. e. establish whether the
vulnerabilities exist in '98? (And yes, I have looked at the page -
though wouldn't claim to have understood it.)

My response, since you posted the warning in a '98 'group, and no other,
was in effect asking whether the new/additional vulnerabilities were
relevant to '98. I appreciate that you may not know the answer to that.

Is that a real question or is this just another walk down some lane you
have in mind...

Genuine, for others' benefit ...

How about you think about JAVA [which is its own environment] then
think about whether the vulnerabilities/issues might be related to the
version itself, for the most part. Since there are no elevation of

Not having your experience, I wouldn't get very far with that kind of
thinking (-:. I could just ask you do these vulnerabilities affect 98 or
not, but I know you want us to do some of the thinking, so am trying to
figure out how: first you told me to "review" it/them, now you're
telling me to "think about" them - but I don't know how.

I told you, it is an environment, as in, running with little control in
*whatever OS it is installed in*. The vulnerabilities exist IN IT. Did
you see a mention for any OS, NO, it was for specific *JAVA*
versions/installations AS DEFINED.

There was an implicit mention of 98 by the warning being posted in,
only, a '98 'group - you didn't cross-post it to any other OS 'groups
nor any Java ones, solely this one. I presume you had a reason for doing
that; maybe I am wrong.

So what the heck do you need to know.. or rather supposedly, since this
IS just another of your recent postings styles in this group..

I don't _need_ to know, I just _wanted_ to know why you posted this
warning here and only here.

Who's next, 98 Guy or one of the others with nothing better to do...
which worthless entity will pop-in now...

Pots and kettles ...


privileges necessary in 9X, not much that would need overcome by a hack
or code or otherwise, would there be.

I shouldn't say this since I write convoluted sentences too, so it's
pots and kettles, but that last sentence is a bit Yoda-like ...

Cut the crap, I'm not playing your games anymore... if you can't
understand anything then what the frig are you posting for and about...
you should be looking at the materials which explain it all to you...

I can understand plenty; I can even make an educated guess at what the
sentence "Since there are no elevation of privileges necessary in 9X,
not much that would need overcome by a hack or code or otherwise, would
there be." was trying to say. It certainly isn't very clear though!

As for the Office vulnerabilities: what do you think...

I'd be most surprised if Office isn't riddled with them. (Not that it's
bad, it's just big, and popular.) But how would I - or an "innocent"
98-user - know if the specific new ones mentioned in the report you
lined to, affect it under 98? And, what would I/he do about it if they do?

Gee, how about looking at the links *within* the vulnerability
reports,,, might be a REAL good place to start...
OR you can rattle on under this subject heading for awhile...

It might indeed. I just assumed that, since you posted the warning in a
98-only 'group, you'd already done some of that for us. I was wrong, or
if I was right, you've now decided not to share your insights. Which is
your right of course.

I had tried to keep this polite.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

All I ask is to _prove_ that money can't make me happy.