Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 20:35:07 -0400 From: Coleman Kane <cokane@one.net> To: Southwell <vizion@ptialaska.net> Cc: David Nixon <david.nixon@mantech.com>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Attachments request -OOOOOPS Message-ID: <20000405203507.C7702@evil.2y.net> In-Reply-To: <001a01bf9f4b$03931e40$2ce346c6@demon.co.uk>; from vizion@ptialaska.net on Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 06:07:44PM -0400 References: <s8eb6f55.084@CORP-GW.mantech.com> <001a01bf9f4b$03931e40$2ce346c6@demon.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Look, I'm only gonna say this once. I do not get the point of your email. You are obviously ragging about a stupid security flaw that is prevalent in windows, and more specifically outlook onto the FreeBSD mailing list. I don't know you personally or anything, but I would really hope that you would know that the virus problem was half because windows has not concept of file/memory/hardware protection mechanisms. Your request to force people to stray from the norm because you want to use some crap to read mail is not our problem, we shall remain as we were before attaching files to email, it is a hell of a lot easier to transfer things like patches, source code, and tarballs by attaching them and then detaching them upon reciept. Also, as far as your complaints about using our mailers correctly and all goes, we do use them correctly. I don't like people telling me I'm being discourteous by doing what the standard is, especially if they are expecting me to abide by the crappy system that Microsoft Outlook Express v 5.00.2919.6600 works well with. I am sorry if I sound rude, but you sir are telling me that you are a 40 year veteran and for some reason that gives you the privilege to request that we politely format our mailing to work with MS Outlook. I am sorry, but, no. Alos, I don't want to ever hear crap about MS Viruses on this list. I hear enough of that crap at work and get tired of it. I would hope that a 40 year IT professional would know that the easiest way to prevent email viruses is to not use a mail program that executes code from inside of an email upon opening it. That is just plain stupid, dumb, retarded, idiodic, and, sad. I would also hope that you would realize that you, being the one, or one of the few using Outlook would at least be somewhat sympathetic to the fact that the attachment thing is your problem and you should work it on your own. A good deal of us use mutt or pine, both of which handle attachments very well and we are not giving that up because microsoft can't make a mail client+os+browser+office+kitchensink bundle that is not riddled with security flaws. Oh yeah, I get my paragraphs all nicely aligned with the nice unix tool "par". A simple keystroke in vim will align them nicely for me to send so that they look good to everyone who reads them. I use mutt 1.0.1 by the way, not netscape. --cokane Coleman Kane President, Univ. of Cincinnati Free OS User Group Southwell had the audacity to say: > David Nixon said: > > That being said (typed), why are you not using an automated e-mail virus > scanner? >=20 > David S Comments: >=20 > I am - but having, I am sad to say, in my working life long experience (n= ow > just over 40 years) in IT learnt that the crazy guys that like to > write/distribute virus`s are currently real keen to find ways of getting > round virus protection systems - including McAfee --the lastest version of > which which I run on my machine. The guys that do this are real genius`s = at > what they do and someone somewhere will no doubt find a way.. if we get > complacent then we will suffer the consequencies.. >=20 > Having been caught out once myself - true about five years ago, with a vi= rus > attached to an email- which was not detected by a virus detector - I am l= eft > believing that a gram of prevention is worth a ton of cure.. >=20 > Secondly why use an attachment when it is just as easy to paste text > directly into your email? .. I mean attachment are fine for subsidiary > documents but surely unnecessary for the main message body? >=20 > Thirdly why discourtesy force people to have to open attachments when the > standard method (and always has been since uucp days) has been to send > emails in the clear? >=20 > Anyway that is my view on the matter but I do not want the discussion to = be > blown up out of all proportion..it is not that significant - I made a > request - if the one or two odd balls that post exclusively using > attachments want to carry on doing so - it is their choice - likewise it = is > my choice to bin emails that comprise only attachments.. >=20 > Basically noone should rely on virus protection programs - by definition > they can only deal with known viruses and or known virus techniques.. >=20 > david S. >=20 >=20 --gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE469u6ERViMObJ880RAYxYAJ4rJGKo5Mby+KCAkyG6oY3v/PkhAwCg4low DXH/QoLk7b/g9LaUmW7CRk4= =Ad/k -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gKMricLos+KVdGMg-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000405203507.C7702>