From: "Geo" 

"John Beckett"  wrote
in message news:7l8ef1hnk78tj9dkoa072evo3gvb9q7n1o{at}4ax.com...

> You really should step back on this one! I would be the first to cheer
> when you point out some stupid design decision in Microsoft or Cisco or
> whatever systems. But THERE IS NO VULNERABILITY in Monad!

In the strictest sense you are correct, there is no bug being exploited.
But now realize that the lack of a security control could also enable
something like oh I don't know lets say a public web server to be
compromised because a scripting language can't be controlled so anyone with
a website could purposely upload a script that infects all the other
scripts on the system.

DOES THAT NOT MAKE THE MACHINE VULNERABLE???

I'm not saying that's what this is all about, I'm just trying to give you
an idea why someone would have to create proof of concept code to make a
point. Whether that point was for the programmers at MS or whether it was
for an underground group of virus writers or DHS or whoever I've no idea. I
just think it likely that it was for the guys writing the shell.

Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5