<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 12/17/2016 7:10 AM, Magnus Melin
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mkmelin+mozilla@iki.fi"><mkmelin+mozilla@iki.fi></a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:2ec905e0-9e57-0118-d36c-fb4974ca11fc@iki.fi"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
On 16.12.2016 17:24, Disaster Master wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f2273f62-0389-ab8e-7b21-2990cb9aee97@gmail.com">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/15/2016 7:02 PM, R Kent James
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kent@caspia.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><kent@caspia.com></a> wrote: </div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:12b6c4eb-e0a5-b693-cbc5-a0dff2de72ba@caspia.com"
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>
<br>
This supports my feeling that the security risks are actually
much smaller for TB than they would be for, for example, Pale
Moon.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
The security risks are very present,</blockquote>
<br>
Only one person (Jim) has responded with any specifics on these
risks, but alas didn't respond to my follow-up about how or whether
or not it would be possible to mitigate said risks - regardless, I
didn't grok his response, so have no way of knowing if the risks are
real (for TB) or not.<br>
<br>
Care to elaborate on what *you* mean by risks? Specifically with
respect to TB? Specifically, with regard to my comments about there
possibly being ways to mitigate or even eliminate said risks by
simply locking down the HTML capabilities to a bare minimum
necessary for rendering HTML emails in a safe way?<br>
<br>
Again, it will apparently be *years* before the need to fork Gecko
would come to pass - *if* it did, so it isn't like there isn't some
time to make informed decisions and have our options ready.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:2ec905e0-9e57-0118-d36c-fb4974ca11fc@iki.fi"
type="cite"> you're just living on hope thatnobody bothers to
target you.</blockquote>
<br>
No, seriously, I'm not, so please stop presuming to know my mind.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:2ec905e0-9e57-0118-d36c-fb4974ca11fc@iki.fi"
type="cite"> Just to put things in numbers: there have been 96
security advisories from Mozilla this year alone. So with Gecko
7.0.1 (from 2011) there are virtually hundreds of holes just
looming along in Postbox. These are so old security bugs that they
are public by now, many with explicit instructions...<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Are you sure that every one of these security advisories apply to TB
and the way it uses Gecko?<br>
<br>
I mean - Firefox is a web browser. TB is *not*. Surely there are a
*ton* of 'features' in Gecko that TB doesn't use and has no need
for?<br>
<br>
Again...<br>
<br>
Would it not be possible to lock down TB to a specific subset of
Gecko functions in order to let it render basic HTML emails, but
minimize or even eliminate the security risks that would otherwise
plague a full blown web browser?<br>
</body>
</html>