Re: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s) - suggestion

2003-07-03 Thread Simon Byrnand
At 15:49 3/07/03 -0700, Justin Mason wrote: Simon Byrnand writes: >Ok, I've got a great idea here, how about the list administrator (is there >one ?) unsubscribes the 4 or so people who have badly behaving virus >scanners, until they sort out their problems ? LOL -- there's about 200 ;)I'm not

Re: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s) - suggestion

2003-07-03 Thread Alan Leghart
-On Thursday, July 03, 2003 3:49 PM -0700 Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Simon Byrnand writes: Ok, I've got a great idea here, how about the list administrator (is there one ?) unsubscribes the 4 or so people who have badly behaving virus scanners, until they sort out their problems ?

Re: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s) - suggestion

2003-07-03 Thread Justin Mason
Simon Byrnand writes: >Ok, I've got a great idea here, how about the list administrator (is there >one ?) unsubscribes the 4 or so people who have badly behaving virus >scanners, until they sort out their problems ? LOL -- there's about 200 ;)I'm not joking. Every few days for the last wee

Re: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s) - suggestion

2003-07-03 Thread Simon Byrnand
At 06:13 3/07/03 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Incident Information:- Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Spamassassin-talk digest, Vol 1 #1342 - 12 msgs WARNING: The file your_details.zip you received was infected with the W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] virus. The

RE: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s)

2003-06-29 Thread Simon Byrnand
At 12:10 27/06/03 -0500, Steve Halligan wrote: People, please configure your virus scanners not to reply to the sender. Most viri these days are spoofing the sender anyway. -steve I was just thinking about sending a complaint (not a nasty one) to the postmaster address of each of these rampant vir

RE: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s)

2003-06-27 Thread Steve Halligan
Let me rephrase that. Stop sending virus warning to the recipients. Especially non-local recipients. Especially if the recipient is a list. > People, please configure your virus scanners not to reply to > the sender. > Most viri these days are spoofing the sender anyway. > -steve > > > Incident

Re: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s)

2003-06-27 Thread Will Yardley
Steve Halligan wrote: > People, please configure your virus scanners not to reply to the sender. > Most viri these days are spoofing the sender anyway. And most viruses too. --- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites incl

RE: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s)

2003-06-27 Thread Steve Halligan
People, please configure your virus scanners not to reply to the sender. Most viri these days are spoofing the sender anyway. -steve > Incident Information:- > > Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject:Spamassassin-talk digest, Vol 1 #1321 - 28 msgs > > WARNIN

RE: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s) OT?

2003-06-27 Thread Mike Schrauder
Sorry, I didn't see the huge thread on this this morning. I am an idiot. Please ignore. Mike Schrauder > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 9:31 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s) > >

RE: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s) OT?

2003-06-27 Thread Yorkshire Dave
On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 15:18, Mike Schrauder wrote: > Does this mean satalk email was the victim of a joe job? Sorry for the ignorance, > just curious. > > Mike Schrauder > No, it's just the latest worm doing the rounds, forging and mailing itself to any address it can find, accompanied by a ch

RE: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s) OT?

2003-06-27 Thread Mike Schrauder
Does this mean satalk email was the victim of a joe job? Sorry for the ignorance, just curious. Mike Schrauder > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 9:31 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] Report to Recipient(s