Re: Viruses - I'm fed up too

I say ban all attachments. If you have a Web page you want someone to
look at, post it on your site, either as an actual .htm file or as a
zipped file. 

Dave Raggett is not at fault. He's using Linux (as I am) and is not the
source of the virus emails. 

But that means that SOMEONE on this list has the klez virus, and has
done nothing about it. So, could all the Windows users PLEASE update
your anti-virus software and scan your hard drives? That way your
viruses won't negatively affect the rest of us on this list who don't
use operating systems that are outrageously susceptible to viruses and
other dreck.

Thanks.

Scott

On Sat, 2002-10-26 at 12:26, Charles Reitzel wrote:
> 
> At 06:34 PM 10/26/2002 +0200, Jany Quintard wrote:
> > > I wonder if allowing only text/* would be possible?
> >
> >That's what we do on DSSSL list.
> >Text files are directly included in mails.
> 
> The Apache lists do that, and the results are not always what you 
> expect.  It seems you might as well just disallow all attachments and paste 
> in the markup.  Most people do anyway and at least you know what you are 
> sending before you send it.
> 
> Proper attachments are convenient because most mail readers have an easy 
> way to save the file locally.  I just drop files into my Tidy test 
> directory and open them with TidyUI to get a quick look at the problem.  It 
> saves me several steps.  Call me lazy ...
> 
> Also, it strikes me that an attachment is _less_ likely than in-line text 
> to be executed as a script by the mail reader.
> 
> Sorry so picky.  Btw, who can/will actually do anything about managing this 
> list?
> 
> take it easy,
> Charlie
> 
-- 
R. Scott Granneman
scott@granneman.com ~ www.granneman.com
Join GranneNotes! Information at www.granneman.com

"If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular
error."
      ---John Kenneth Galbraith

Received on Saturday, 26 October 2002 16:14:14 UTC