<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/16/2016 11:33 AM, Wayne Mery
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:vseerror@lehigh.edu"><vseerror@lehigh.edu></a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:7828269b-0436-8916-1afd-2dde383f0bec@lehigh.edu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 12/16/2016 10:24 AM, Disaster Master wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 12/15/2016 7:02 PM, R Kent James <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kent@caspia.com"><kent@caspia.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Postbox's new release is on Gecko 7.0.1, which is now over 5 years old. I have not heard any great outcry about their security issues, and someone on this list (...cough.. BK...cough..ensa) keeps telling us what a great product that is, and how popular it is in Mozilla. So clearly forking Gecko is a CHOICE, and if people at Mozilla are using it then some people at Mozilla must not care that it is based on old Gecko, either.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
This supports my feeling that the security risks are actually much
smaller for TB than they would be for, for example, Pale Moon.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
That's great theory, but little comfort if you are the user who gets
dataloss or a breach.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Ummm... no offense, but that comment, by itself, is little more than
FUD.<br>
<br>
I'm still waiting on someone to answer the specific question about
what, specifically, are the risks.<br>
<br>
If the 'browser' 'feature' in TB is removed, and only basic HTML
email rendering is allowed (lock it down I say), what, exactly, are
these mysterious risks?<br>
<br>
Since you seem to be aware of them, by all means, I'm listening.<br>
</body>
</html>