August 25th, 2008, 05:43 AM
But enabling permanent ssl would make uploading/downloading large attachments much slower, also if this vulnerability is in gmail wouldn't it be in many other sites as well? Why does Perry specifically target gmail. I'm just trying to get a better understanding of this.
Last edited by ninjafish; August 25th, 2008 at 05:47 AM.
August 25th, 2008, 08:44 AM
t3abag - If I set up gmail through outlook I would obviously need INternational bandwidth , it wouldnt work through a local only account ?
Jsut checking :P
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.
August 25th, 2008, 02:20 PM
That is correct ninjafish, it would use more bandwith butI wouldnt worry about that too much, its just emails and most of the payload is on the server :-P
August 26th, 2008, 03:16 AM
Yes it does affect others.......... please look at my post #8 in this thread.
also if this vulnerability is in gmail wouldn't it be in many other sites as well? Why does Perry specifically target gmail. I'm just trying to get a better understanding of this.
I don't think that Perry is being critical as such, given that Google seem to be the only ones addressing this problem at the moment?
By ThePreacher in forum Miscellaneous Security Discussions
Last Post: December 14th, 2006, 09:37 PM
By 3rr0r in forum The Security Tutorials Forum
Last Post: December 1st, 2004, 06:31 AM
By jehnx in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Last Post: October 30th, 2004, 08:04 AM
By ss2chef in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Last Post: September 7th, 2004, 12:19 AM