Jump to content

Recommended Posts

AcedOut Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It really isn't that clever. It just runs a php

> script (see the 'badge.php' in the url) that runs

> on the facebook servers, telling it to return the

> profile picture of the person logged in.


It's just a bit of fun.

Let's not start with the computer-code-knowing dickswinging thing.

If the full url wasn't shown (posted as a link) then I guess it wouldn't have been such a giveaway.


Someone did this to me and managed to make up a fake BBC news webpage, with my pic embedded in it (dynamic, like this - taking the pic also from facebook). Now that was clever, and caught me out for a while! The headline was "Person wanted for questioning".

AcedOut Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Someone did this to me and managed to make up a

> fake BBC news webpage, with my pic embedded in it

> (dynamic, like this - taking the pic also from

> facebook). Now that was clever, and caught me out

> for a while! The headline was "Person wanted for

> questioning".


This person has more spare time on his hands than I do.


Is he available for lunchtime drinking?


Anytime after 11am will be fine, thinking about it.

Come now, AcedOut.. I think everyone knows what little time computer tekkie types actually spend working.


A rough job breakdown would be:


15% explaining to 'civilians' how difficult it will be to accomplish the task they've been set.

5% doing the job itself.

80% on Facebook, general dickswinging and Googling ex-girlfriends.

  • Administrator

macroban Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Now is this clever or downright dangerous?

> What if it had been a malicious PHP script?

> Does EDF Admin need to review security?


It is definitely not downright dangerous.


We do not want to stop people linking to other websites in their messages and, as in this case, it is on another website that the script runs. We cannot be responsible for other websites and their contents as there are rather a lot of them. I would however recommend that people keep their internet browsing software up to date (FireFox 3 is especially recommended) as their increased security may help those worried by malicious scripts.


Security on the forum is reviewed frequently and any issues we discover are addressed immediately.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The venn diagram of people who are personally really bothered by the noise from GALA and are also deeply concerned about the local bat population looks remarkably just like a circle.
    • Language is a fluid and evolving thing and as it changes the original meaning of words can alter to take on a new true meaning or meanings. Original meaning is not the same as true meaning. Take the word literal which is now used to mean the very opposite of how the word used to be used, irritating for some of us but demonstrates the English language is vibrant and alive and also very subjective. But I must go and make myself a cup of tea now or I will literally die of thirst 
    • With the right type of feeder arrangement the access by parakeets, squirrels and rats can be eliminated completely. Likewise, the spread of disease can be minimised. The best method is to hang individual feeders inside a wire  cage that has a 2"x2" mesh on all sides that is mounted above ground. Being above ground it stops slugs and rats getting in. And with mesh on the bottom,the risk of transmitting disease from any droppings is eliminated. Small birds feel safe from predators in three These cages are available online for about £33
    • It is worthwhile noting that the original technical meaning was 'a reduction of 10%', which does not, to my mind, chime at all with 'drastically reduce'. I know that's how it is, I think lazily, often used nowadays but it does allow 'decimate' to be used so loosely that it loses meaning. And it can be confusing to those who know it's original meaning. I think that the fact that decimate and devastate are close homonyms does not help things here. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...