Sam,
The idiot that sent that message probably had received a message that was
sent to 275 people and had LOOKOUT! set to "Respond to All" and "Show all
recipients."
The SULFNBK.EXE hoax had some very knowledgable people deleting it. It
probably did no harm to the computer as the file is the Start-Up Long File
Name BacK-up in the event that LFNs get deleted and only the 8.3 aliases are
shown. I would imagine that every time the computer is started, the
SULFNBK.EXE file is executed and if it is missing, it is created.
Roger Turk
Tucson, Arizona
Sam Heywood wrote:
. > Hello Arachnids:
. > Someone I know who runs Arachne 1.70, rev. 3 called me today and
. > said that all of the messages in her inbox except for one had
. > "disappeared".
. > I went to her home and took a look at her inbox while within InSight.
. > There were about 25 messages listed having no headers and all having
. > zero bytes except for one. The subject line of the only message
. > showing headers was "RESTORING THE SULFNBK.EXE FILE". When I clicked
. > on this message I got the Arachne Load Error Page.
. > Next I shut down Arachne and started examining the files in the inbox
. > by using a file viewer. All of the CNM files were there and they seemed
. > complete. I found that the idiot who had sent the message about
. > restoring the SULFNBLK.EXE file had addressed the message to approx. 275
. > multiple recipients, each having his email address individually listed!
. > The mailer used was MicroSoft Outlook Express. Doesn't Microsoft Outlook
. > Express have an "@list" type of feature similar to what we find in
. > Arachne and Nettamer and other good email clients? Why would this idiot
. > want to send out so many private email addresses in her message headers?
. > I suppose some idiots just like to chum for trolls.
. > The contents of the offending message I will briefly describe as follows:
. > There was a text body saying something to the effect that in case you
. > deleted the SULFNBK.EXE as a result of responding to a virus hoax, then
. > you should restore it because it is a useful Windows file. The message
. > also had a dupe HTML attachment, a gif image attachment, and if that
. > wasn't bad enough, the idiot even included a MicroSoft Word attachment
. > being a document having instructions on how to restore the SULFNBK.EXE
. > file. Of course these simple instructions could have been just as well
. > presented with ascii text.
. > What would you guys think of some idiot who would be so brash as to
. > insinuate that about 275 people on her mailing list might be so stupid
. > as to have fallen for this virus hoax? What would you think of some idiot
. > that would suppose that all these people would have no idea as to how to
. > go about restoring a standard Windows file that ships with the
. > installation CD-ROM?
. > If all of the above were not bad enough, then here is the idiocy which
. > passeth all understanding: The government is so stupid that it even
. > hired this idiot for a responsible high-salaried supervisory position !!!!
. > Back in the days when I worked for the government, job applicants used to
. > have to present evidence of their knowledge, skills, education,
. > experience, and abilities prior to being accepted even for an interview
. > for an entry level position. Look what is happening now!
. > BTW, after having edited the offending message file by deleting almost
. > all of the muliple recipients' email addresses I was able to view the
. > message within InSight and all of the other message files as well.
. > As a result of the experience described above I have discovered that there
. > is some limit as to the number of multiple recipients that InSight can
. > handle in a CNM file. I haven't yet conducted any experiments to
. > determine what the limit is.
. > Has anyone else yet experienced a problem with a CNM file having too many
. > multiple recipients listed? If not, then look for such a CNM file if ever
. > you should have a problem with viewing whatever is in your inbox. In the
. > Windows world idiots abound.
