Of course, but if we find out, we will remove the sig. :) It just poses a possible security issue - not likely, but some members don't like getting security warnings in their browsers from sigs. :)

I don't really get this. All someone would need to do is the .htaccess method if they want to leave a cookie. Hell, the image doesn't even have to be dynamic. I can see why you'd want to get rid of the "bad" ones (such as ones leaving cookies and such) but innocent dynamic images (such as ones with their board's stats, or a countdown like mine) aren't doing any more harm than a normal .gif would. Even if the PHP script logged some data, it would be no more than can be harvested from a normal .gif images and some stats programs.

A tad overkill imo but for peace and harmony and the fact it don't effect me, i'll go with it :)

I say the rule should concern images setting cookies only.
Sure it would provide more hassle for the staff, but after all the number of pi$$ed off users would be a bigger hassle :p
Not that I give a flying feck either ways, as I cram way too much txt into my sig to fit an image XD

Good point. :)

I've changed the rule so it's more sensible.

I'm a bit confused - doesn't this mean no one can link to a vb forum (or probably most websites) in their sig - since visiting any forum / site usually sets a cookie.

No, it means no one can have an image in their signature that sets a cookie.

Dynamic scripts pretending to be images that try to set cookies. Other dynamic image files etc are allowed.

I don't think my sig image is a problem, but if you could say if you want me to remove it or what ;)

Satan