If anybody is stupid enough to run a binary file from here they deserve any negative consequences which may result from that.
Okay, I know other people are thinking that because it is just so true. This said, someone sent a copy of this lastest fixer msblast variant. I appreciated that. But, proper netiquette says to not send binaries nor pictures to internet lists (newsgroups or mailing lists). It is best to send by url, such urls are very valuable. (Personally, I have never cared about binaries nor pictures being sent as long as their size were small... It is just html email which I hate.) Just some food for thought from a contrary viewpoint. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > S . f . Stover > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 9:06 AM > To: Len Rose > Cc: Raj Mathur; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Administrivia: Binary > Executables w/o Source > > > On 18 Aug 03 03:40:34PM Len [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > : My message was not about the size ofd > : the file but rather about the sheer useless re-transmission > : of a binary (any executable) that no one in their right mind > : would actually run which is why I suggested that source code > : should be included next time. > > Would that really matter though? I mean, how would I know > that the binary included came from the attached source? > > Plus, I do have quarantined machines I blow away and rebuild > regularly that I don't mind putting unknown binaries on from > time to time. Any my mileage definitely does vary ;-) > > Just my 0.02. I figure there's no list like FD for unknown > binaries... > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > GPG Key ID: 0xF8F859D0 > http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0xF8F859D0&op=index "There is no such thing as right and wrong, there's just popular opinion." -Jeffrey Goines _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
