exactly.

Dana

On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 13:58:00 -0400, William Wheatley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

> /me nods
>
> And the best part is alot of the bonehead isps dont use smtp servers that
> actually check the ip they just blindly follow whatever is sent to them.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 1:56 PM
> Subject: Re: how stupid
>
>
>> Only the IP number in the email header will reveal the true source of 
>> the
>> virus-infected email.
>>
>> The from address is usually spoofed.
>>
>> ======================================
>> Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway!
>> For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com
>> ISP rated: http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772
>> ======================================
>> If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done!
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Garza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:27 PM
>> Subject: Re: how stupid
>>
>>
>> | Actually, the Klez virus can take any email from the list it's sending
> from
>> | and use that email as the From and Reply-To fields.  This happend to 
>> my
> mom.
>> | I'm sure she doesn't have the Klez virus on her machine yet she still
> gets
>> | about 50 bounce messages a day from AOL.  One of the unpleasant
>> | potentialities of dealing with Klez...  So, Dana, you probably never 
>> had
> the
>> | virus in the first place and AOL sucks for sending back the entire
> message,
>> | virus attachment and all..  Their mail gateway should delete the 
>> entier
>> | message and send a digest of the transaction back to the "purported"
> sender.
>> |
>> | Jeff
>> |
>> | ----- Original Message -----
>> | From: "William Wheatley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> | To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> | Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 10:18 AM
>> | Subject: Re: how stupid
>> |
>> |
>> | No i wasn't patronizing you but that error message by itself when you
> read
>> | it shows that it was rejecting a message you sent. Of course without 
>> all
> the
>> | facts thats the only conclusion one could come to.
>> |
>> | Does the virus send fake emails proporting to be from the ISP? Its 
>> easy
> to
>> | spoof mail and such that might be a fun virus to have to deal with 
>> fake
>> | Daemon messages that actually have viruses.
>> |
>> |
>> | ----- Original Message -----
>> | From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> | To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> | Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:27 PM
>> | Subject: Re: how stupid
>> |
>> |
>> | > Ahem. AOL emailed me the sobig.e virus according to my Norton
> antivirus.
>> | > The email has an attachment labeled your_details.zip, which is per 
>> the
>> | > specs for this virus. Naturally I did not open it. But the email is
> not
>> | > from [EMAIL PROTECTED]; the email is *from* AOL saying my email to her was 
>> not
>> | > delivered because it has a virus. Which they helpfully included for
>> | > reference. Now, from the top, this virus claims to be from people 
>> who
> are
>> | > also in the address book of the original sender. I do not know ruthj
> and
>> | > she is not in my address book, and I don't have this virus because
> norton
>> | > caught it in this email that AOL sent me.
>> | >
>> | > God I hate it when you patronize me, especially when you usually 
>> don't
>> | have
>> | > a good grasp of what is going on when you do it.
>> | >
>> | > Dana
>> | >
>> | > On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 12:18:19 -0400, William Wheatley 
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> | > wrote:
>> | >
>> | > > That doesn't say aol sent you a virus that says whoever mailed 
>> that
> ruth
>> | > > person has a virus that was in their email and they had better fix
> it.
>> | > >
>> | > > But either way aol is evil.
>> | > >
>> | > >
>> | > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dana Tierney"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> | > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> | > > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:12 PM
>> | > > Subject: Re: how stupid
>> | > >
>> | > >
>> | > >> the AOL user didnt send me the virus. AOL did. I got the 
>> following,
>> | with
>> | > >> the virus as an attachment.
>> | > >>
>> | > >> The original message was received at Thu, 26 Jun 2003
> 06:09:09 -0400
>> | > >> (EDT)
>> | > >> from  [66.72.7.21]
>> | > >>
>> | > >> *** ATTENTION ***
>> | > >> Your e-mail is being returned to you because there was a problem
> with
>> | > >> its
>> | > >> delivery.  The address which was undeliverable is listed in the
> section
>> | > >> labeled: "----- The following addresses had permanent fatal
>> | errors -----
>> | > >> ".
>> | > >> The reason your mail is being returned to you is listed in the
> section
>> | > >> labeled: "----- Transcript of Session Follows -----".
>> | > >> The line beginning with "<<<" describes the specific reason your
> e-mail
>> | > >> could
>> | > >> not be delivered.  The next line contains a second error message
> which
>> | > >> is
>> | > > a
>> | > >> general translation for other e-mail servers.
>> | > >> Please direct further questions regarding this message to your
> e-mail
>> | > >> administrator.
>> | > >> --AOL Postmaster
>> | > >>
>> | > >>
>> | > >> ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
>> | > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> | > >> ----- Transcript of session follows -----
>> | > >> ... while talking to air-xm03.mail.aol.com.:
>> | > >> >>> DATA
>> | > >> <<< 554 TRANSACTION FAILED - Unrepairable Virus Detected. Your 
>> mail
> has
>> | > > not
>> | > >> been sent.
>> | > >> 554 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Service unavailable
>> | > >>
>> | > >> On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 10:59:06 -0500, Matt Blatchley ~ Bridgeleaf
> Studios
>> | > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> | > >>
>> | > >> > Dana,
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > I run into similar issues with AOL users.  I have a few clients
> who
>> | > >> > refuse
>> | > >> > to use the email addresses I setup for them and they send me
> virus's
>> | > >> too
>> | > >> > stating I sent it to them.  Big pain in the ass because I've
>> | requested
>> | > >> a
>> | > >> > response from the folks at AOL, but like you said, the level of
>> | > >> response
>> | > >> > is
>> | > >> > by someone part time and doesn't give two shiznitz about anyone
> other
>> | > >> > than
>> | > >> > their own customers, and that's only if they bitch 
>> consistently.
> I'd
>> | > >> > love
>> | > >> > to rant about them two, but I'll spare the rest of the list my
>> | opinion
>> | > > on
>> | > >> > that issue seeing as how they can all assume my feelings on 
>> that
> one
>> | > >> > anyway.
>> | > >> > I feel for ya!
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > Matt
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > -----Original Message-----
>> | > >> > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> | > >> > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 10:34 AM
>> | > >> > To: CF-Community
>> | > >> > Subject: how stupid
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > (rant)
>> | > >> > I was complaining yesterday about getting a little notice
> scolding me
>> | > > for
>> | > >> > allegedly sending a virus to somebody I don't know in Finland.
> The
>> | > >> virus
>> | > >> > in
>> | > >> > question puts names from the true sender's address book in the
> "from"
>> | > >> > field, but apparently the system in question is not set up to
> check
>> | ip
>> | > >> > addresses.
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > I ran an extra virus scan last night to be sure, and no, I 
>> don't
> have
>> | > >> > this
>> | > >> > virus. I would not expect to as my virus software scans 
>> incoming
>> | mail.
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > This scan works, as demonstrated by the fact that this morning 
>> it
>> | > >> warned
>> | > >> > me
>> | > >> > that someone emailed me a virus. Come to find out it is AOL,
>> | > >> complaining
>> | > >> > that I sent this virus to [EMAIL PROTECTED], whom I do not know.
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > The truly astounding thing is that *they mailed the virus to
> me* --
>> | is
>> | > >> > that
>> | > >> > supposed to prove something? What if I did not in fact have up 
>> to
>> | date
>> | > >> > software? I used to work at AOL so I am well past expecting
>> | > >> intelligence
>> | > >> > from them, but geez, this practice is a threat to the health of
> the
>> | > >> > internet. Too bad it doesn't have a WHO.
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > (end rant)
>> | > >> > Dana
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> > --
>> | > >> > Mr Jones and me
>> | > >> > We're stumbling through the barrio....
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> >
>> | > >> >
>> | > >>
>> | > >
>> | >
>> |
>> |
>>
> 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5

Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

                                Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
                                

Reply via email to