"Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003:10:01:00:53:46+0100] scribed: > on Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 12:11:16PM -0400, Mike Mueller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Tuesday 30 September 2003 02:05, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > Seems > > > like about the only way we're going to get a reasonable handle on this > > > barring ISPs refusing to carry executables in email format. > > > > Hear! Hear! No more attachments - period. I'll settle for elimination of > > any known sort of executable though. > > No. > > Specifically: executables. Various other mail 'sploits -- there are > some header buffer overflows, IIRC affecting LookOut -- exist and should > be filtered as well. But specifically, AUPs against transmission of > executable content, and concomittant filtering, would serve a useful > purpose. There are opaque formats, from zip to tarball to encrypted > payloads, which can be used by those sufficiently clueful to handle the > task appropriately. > > MIME attachments of themselves serve many useful functions. There's an > awful lot of baby in that bathwater. Starting with the signature on > this message.
I agree, up to a point. What really constitutes an `executable' program -- surely *not* its file extension ?!?! -- Best Regards, mds mds resource 877.596.8237 - Dare to fix things before they break . . . - Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much we think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . . --
malware.zip
Description: Zip archive
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
