" I receive any format that was sent, I just read them only in plaintext ;)"
Ich auch. Hmm, so the problem in the case of the list is that it is a broadcast medium, and someone can be expected to not practice safe unzipping. Got it. OK, no attachments. Then it is up to those who pull them from wherever they are parked to be prudent? I suppose that is better. Not sure about the issue-tracker case. Waiting to hear the story about that one. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Eike Rathke [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 15:10 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ooo-user] was RE: [email protected] [Was: Re: [Discussion] [email protected]] Hi Dennis, On Wednesday, 2011-08-31 13:56:13 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > When's the last time you heard of malicious code in a Microsoft Office > file? No recent version will run macro code without warning and > default disabling on load. True, nowadays sending such may be pointless. > I would expect mail clients to also be > circumspect about allowing direct opening of document files provided > as attachments. Double Click, "Do you really want to open this attachment?" YES, OK. > I think the recommendation for those, for the wary, would be to allow > Zip and encourage people to package anything simpler than an image > that way. Of course images and PDFs have exploits too. > > Perhaps the truly-safe cases are only text and zip? To the contrary. Only this month I received about 50 .zip attachments that exclusively contained malware, .exe .com .scr .cmd .bat etc. Not including mails that were filtered out by anti-spam measures before they even reached my inbox. > I don't know about you, but I also only receive e-mail in plaintext. I receive any format that was sent, I just read them only in plaintext ;) Eike -- PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication. Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
