What a luxury it would be to just dump all attachments, but if you're a service provider I don't think you'd last to long...
Eric Long SystemLink Broadband Corp. 10460 Roosevelt Blvd. Suite 277 St. Petersburg, FL 33716 www.systemlinkbroadband.com Main 727.556.9033 Support 727.573.9020 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rod Dorman Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 1:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [IMGate] Re: Email with password protected attachments are defeating Virus Scanners On Tuesday, March 2, 2004, 19:54:18, Bill Landry wrote: >> It wouldn't make any sense to allow un-passworded .zips >> and block only password protected ones. > > Why not? If the zip files are not password protected, then you can > effectively virus scan them. But if they are password protected, then you > can't, so block them. I suppose it depends upon your user base. People 'zip' files for a variety of reasons: * for the compression (hopefully exceeding the MIME expansion) * to put lots of files into one handy package * for privacy/security in case the e-mail is intercepted If they put a high benefit on the last one they're not going to understand why they have to lose that feature in order to continue to receive archives. Its all a lost cause anyway. Any idiot that's stupid enough to enter a password to unzip a file they weren't expecting and run the contents is stupid enough to follow directions to rename virus.zap to virus.zip before unziping too. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Another one o' them new worlds. No beer, no Rod Dorman women, no pool parlors, nothing. Nothing to do but throw rocks at tin cans. And we gotta bring our own tin cans. -- Earl Holliman (Cookie), Forbidden Planet
