| ??? 01/13/03 18:19 Read: times |
#36351 - RE: Donald |
You may be right. Thanks for the explanation. I think Peter Conrad can better explain what he actually meant.
What I got form this confusing sentence, is that Peter conrad has actually succeeded in breaking the lock bits. Thats why I asked him to share with us so that we may be able to use some more secure protection scheme. If this is the case then Peter Conrad probabily missed a "coma" at an appropriate place and I should apologise with him for anything wrong from my side. Regards Ijaz |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| well Rauf | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits Jez | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: paranoia | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: paranoia | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: paranoia | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: paranoia | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: paranoia | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Michael | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: IJAZ | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Michael | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: lock bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Donald | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Donald | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 |



