John... Interesting points about the macro capabilities. I hadn't thought about that. FWIW, I received that email while at work, and we're also behind a firewall and utilize Norton corporate version antivirus software. Our firewall apparently doesn't strip messages such as this to attachments. I usually have no problems seeing normal picture attachments. I also haven't had any problems with viruses in this environment. I'm still dialup at home, but already have the firewall software for when I make the high speed jump!!! Thanks for the info!
John Heiser wrote: > > Hi Doug, > > The message may have been "stripped" into an attachment by my firewall. Note my >.gov address....I have anti-virus software and firewalls out the > wazoo. We have been under severe attack by foreign hackers for the last few months >and have beefed up security unbelievably. But, I must add our > network security has done an outstanding job. It is all invisible to us, we can >freely communicate with anyone and, hackers have not been able to > compromise our system one bit. [aside: the rate of attack at one point was >thousands per minute] I had assumed the attachment would turn up > harmless since it was not intercepted by our security (they notify me when this >happens). But I hate to be the first one to find a new front of > attack. lol > > True a .txt would not run as an executable, but it would be opened by windows 95, >98, NT, Me, 2000 or XP if you double click it in the explorer which > is how many people would "open" it. Most of these operating systems default to use >a specific program (normally notepad or Word) to open .txt files. > If it were Word then macro capabilities are possible and hence macro viruses which >are the most common right now. This is one of the distinct > weaknesses in Microsoft products (also one of their basic strengths). They allow >macros that can be very potent. If you open .txt with the right > program no problem but the wrong one could be trouble. Of course, most virus >authors don't want to rely on a multi-step user interface, but they > have been fairly creative as of late and have been exploiting users curiosity and >naivet�. Don't let your guard down too much or as in my case don't > fret it too much but keep a good back-up! > > To make a long post longer, as a warning as to how bad the hacking can be, junior >hackers are now targeting optimum online users (and other high > speed users). The optimum system has a dedicated IP address for each user and makes >it easy to find a specific computer. With dial up service you > never have the same IP twice in a row. When I started Optimum (for my daughters) at >X-mas time I would not allow them to use it until I had put on a > firewall and some of my own security. The first day my daughter used it, she >downloaded a music file (this is one of the biggest uses for teenagers > right now) and the music files typically are on private small servers (home >computers that have allowed shared access) because most of the music is > pirated. While she was downloading (I hope not pirated music) the host computer >started hacking and tried to get into my system. My security > software notified my daughter and she got me. I watched a lines as the program was >searching for software and then locked it out. This is a new way > that "kid hackers" are using to steal software. Invite you to download, then upload >a program to your system and backdoor some software copying. > While harmless to you (but not software manufacturers) it can just as easily be >turned into malicious behavior. Use a firewall. > > BTW, My leos have started laying for the new season. (just to be topical). Now if >those milli and Rhacs would just get going.... > > Regards, > John > > Doug Johnston wrote: > > > I also use Netscape for my mail program and did not get the link as an > > attachment... just a valid link I was able to follow. BTW... a .txt file > > would not execute even if opened as it's not an executable filetype. > > > > John Heiser wrote: > > > > > > No Problem! I am just paranoid ; ) I am fully protected with all the latest >wiz bang security software but I'm still cautious. Heck I don't > > > even use Outlook because I don't like the lack of security. I still use >Netscape for mail and I am immune from all those macro viruses. It > > > was just that the message stated if you can't see it copy to hard drive and try >to open it. That is a no-no thing to state and with the recent > > > new virus (on the news last night as a matter of fact) that is going after >anti-virus programs well I just wanted others who may not be fully > > > protected to be wary. > > > > > > Regards, > > > John > > > > > > ps It may be my use of Netscape that caused you message to come to me as an >attachment as opposed to fully open as a few others received it. I > > > bet they were all using Outlook. > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm not much on the technicalities of computers, really just a user of >technology. > > > > > > > > This e-mail might "appear" diferent because I sent it directly from KOMO, the >TV station. > > > > > > > > If you do open it you will actually discover that a gecko from India hid in a >box of crane lawn ornaments. The package originated in India. > > > > > > > > Did not mean to cause alarm. > > > > > > > > Elizabeth > > > > > > ########################################################################### > > > THE GLOBAL GECKO ASSOCIATION LISTSERV > > > WebSite: www.gekkota.com Archive: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/ > > > The GGA takes no responsibility for the contents of these postings. > > > ########################################################################### > > > > -- > > Doug Johnston -- Doug Johnston
