RE: Urgent Confidential
Actually it was David Hannum, not W.C. Fields and not P.T. Barnum who said it. But who's really keeping track. Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator UW - Green Bay 920.465.5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep. - Scott Adams -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 12:24 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Urgent Confidential As W.C. Fields once said there's a sucker born every minute. -- From: Bob Sadler Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 11:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Urgent Confidential Really? I can't believe that! I mean you have to believe there are hundreds of banks with this very problem! Who in their right mind would not take advantage to get all that money! You could be richer then Bill Gates in no time! Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA WAN/Internet Specialist 913-339-6700 x194 Get a Life! Get TWO! Play Second Life! http://secondlife.com/ss/?u=b4ebbfdd6af98a027fa7e89a86c55a68 -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 11:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Urgent Confidential There was an article a few months back in a local newspaper about some people who reacted on a similar mail, they turn out to request headed paper, bank account numbers, swift codes etc... In the end their savings account was empty, and not the other way around... K/ -Original Message- From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: woensdag 27 augustus 2003 18:03 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Urgent Confidential Hundreds? Wow! You could rolling in the cash if you just respond!* Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA WAN/Internet Specialist 913-339-6700 x194 Get a Life! Get TWO! Play Second Life! http://secondlife.com/ss/?u=b4ebbfdd6af98a027fa7e89a86c55a68 *Note - I'm being factitious of course -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 10:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Urgent Confidential We get hundreds of those every day. How did he get on this list? Did he subscribe? Kind regards, Kim Schotanus === Kim Schotanus Information Systems Manager INTAS Avenue des Arts 58 B-1000 Brussels Belgium T. +32 2 549 01 11 F. +32 2 549 01 56 === -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: woensdag 27 augustus 2003 16:08 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Urgent Confidential Onuigbo is my new buddy. Always wanted a lawyer friend called Onuigbo From: Bob Sadler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Urgent Confidential Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:04:26 -0500 WOW! 25 Million Dollars! SIGN ME UP NOW! Bob Sadler City of Leawood, KS, USA WAN/Internet Specialist 913-339-6700 x194 Get a Life! Get TWO! Play Second Life! http://secondlife.com/ss/?u=b4ebbfdd6af98a027fa7e89a86c55a68 -Original Message- From: Baldwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 9:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Urgent Confidential Dear Sir/Madam, I am Mr. Onuigbo Baldwin Gozie, Bank Manager of Diamond Bank, Lagos Branch. I have urgent and very confidential business proposition for you Mr. Barry Kelly made a numbered time (Fixed) deposited for twelve calendar months, valued at US$25,000,000.00 (Twenty-five Million Dollars) in my branch. Upon maturity, I sent a routine notification to his forwarding address but got no reply. After a month, we sent a reminder and finally we discovered from his contract employers, Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation that Mr. Barry Kelly died from an automobile accident. On further investigation, I found out that he did not leave a WILL and all attempts to trace his next of kin were fruitless. I therefore made further investigation and discovered that Mr. Barry Kelly did not declare any next of kin in all his official documents, including his Bank Deposit paperwork. This sum of US$25,000,000.00 is still sitting in the Bank and the interest is being rolled over with the principal sum at the end of each year. No one will come forward to claim it. According to the Nigerian Law, at the expiration of 6{Six} years, the money will revert to the ownership of the Nigerian Government if nobody applies to claim the funds Consequently, my proposal is that I will like you as a foreigner to stand in as the next of kin to Mr. Barry Kelly so that the fruits of this
Message filter in Exchange 2000
I am quite familiar with Q258696 about modifying global settings in Exchange 2000 and have read the section on Creating a Message Filter List. In that section it gives the following examples on adding filters. [EMAIL PROTECTED] *@ domain.com user@*. domain.com *@*. domain.com I want to do a different filter and it hasn't work and I'm wondering if anyone can explain why or how I would set this type of filter up. *@bounce.*.* If anyone has any insight into this, I would greatly appreciate it. - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Must be Fri 13th
I vote server. But doing both wouldn't hurt. -Original Message- From: Don Couch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 3:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Must be Fri 13th To all: Is it me? Or is it my stupid head cold? I, for the life of me, by reading this KDB article, can not determine whether my server machine or client machine needs to be upgraded. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;305596 The situation: Workstation: Windows 2000 SP1 running Outlook 2000 SR1 outside the network. Server: Windows 2000 Server SP2, Exchange 2000 SP2 I try to hook up to the server from outside the network (all traffic from specific IP is passed through the FW). I can connect but I get the following when Outlook runs: Unable to expand the folder. The set of folders could not be opened. The information store could not be opened. I checked the above article and am not sure which to upgrade (DON'T want to upgrade the server as of yet). If you feel up to it, I appreciate your comments. Aloha, Don Couch Systems Administrator 808-891-7915 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Pacific Disaster Center/East West Center 590 Lipoa Parkway Suite 259 Kihei, HI. 96753 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Microsoft's goof making my life miserable
In the glory days of Exchange 5.5 there was a reg hack one could do to limit the total number of recipients in a message without having an adverse effect on Distribution Lists being in the message. Now with Exchange 2000 and AD, every recipient in a DL is counted towards the total recipient count. This is quite troublesome when we have several large distribution lists. Has anyone found a workaround to this or is this something we have to live with? - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maximum Recipients per Message Limit.
In the glory days of Exchange 5.5 there was a reg hack one could do to limit the total number of recipients in a message without having an adverse effect on Distribution Lists being in the message. Now with Exchange 2000 and AD, every recipient in a DL is counted towards the total recipient count. This is quite troublesome when we have several large distribution lists. Is there a workaround to this or is this something we have to live with? - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Event ID 8213
I've been getting a repeating error message in my Eventlog on my Exchange 2000 SP3 server that us running the RUS. The following error message comes up once very 25 minutes: Event Type: Error Event Source: MSExchangeFBPublish Event Category: General Event ID: 8213 Date: 10/15/2002 Time: 8:31:31 AM User: N/A Computer: MSA Description: System Attendant Service failed to create session for virtual machine MSA. The error number is 0x80044501. For more information, click http://www.microsoft.com/contentredirect.asp. I found Q296151 and tried doing the fix in the article however, it has not taken care of the error. I find steps 9-11 a bit confusing though, and maybe I'm not setting the security correctly. Does anyone have any insight to this error or maybe help me interpret the fix from PSS? - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Event ID 8213
I've been getting a repeating error message in my Eventlog on my Exchange 2000 SP3 server that us running the RUS. The following error message comes up once very 25 minutes: Event Type: Error Event Source: MSExchangeFBPublish Event Category: General Event ID: 8213 Date: 10/15/2002 Time: 8:31:31 AM User: N/A Computer: MSA Description: System Attendant Service failed to create session for virtual machine MSA. The error number is 0x80044501. For more information, click http://www.microsoft.com/contentredirect.asp. I found Q296151 and tried doing the fix in the article however, it has not taken care of the error. I find steps 9-11 a bit confusing though, and maybe I'm not setting the security correctly. Does anyone have any insight to this error or maybe help me interpret the fix from PSS? - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resolve hidden users
In Exchange 5.5 it was possible to resolve a hidden user based on the Distinguished Name. Is it possible to do something similar with Exchange 2000? We have students who for one reason or another do not want to have their e-mail address published in the GAL. So far, I've only found articles talking about how Outlook resolves the user name based on the GAL. If anyone out there in Guru Land has some ideas or suggestions, I'm all ears. - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resolve hidden users
In Exchange 5.5 it was possible to resolve a hidden user based on the Distinguished Name. Is it possible to do something similar with Exchange 2000? We have students who for one reason or another do not want to have their e-mail address published in the GAL. So far, I've only found articles talking about how Outlook resolves the user name based on the GAL. If anyone out there in Guru Land has some ideas or suggestions, I'm all ears. - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Resolve hidden users
Actually I'm trying to resolve the mailbox when the user opens Outlook. In the past we would put the Distinguished Name in the Mailbox: box in setting up the profile. Then by clicking Check Name, the name would resolve to the user's mailbox. Now that doesn't work and I was wondering if anyone found a workaround for this. -Pete -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users You mean when you type an address in the to field and the LDAP querrie comes up with who it is for? --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond What are you on about mate? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kretche, Peter Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 6:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Resolve hidden users In Exchange 5.5 it was possible to resolve a hidden user based on the Distinguished Name. Is it possible to do something similar with Exchange 2000? We have students who for one reason or another do not want to have their e-mail address published in the GAL. So far, I've only found articles talking about how Outlook resolves the user name based on the GAL. If anyone out there in Guru Land has some ideas or suggestions, I'm all ears. - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Resolve hidden users
Not really an option for 300 users and mandatory profiles. Thought about doing it though. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users Unhide the mailbox and then do it. Then hide it again. -Original Message- From: Kretche, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 10:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users Actually I'm trying to resolve the mailbox when the user opens Outlook. In the past we would put the Distinguished Name in the Mailbox: box in setting up the profile. Then by clicking Check Name, the name would resolve to the user's mailbox. Now that doesn't work and I was wondering if anyone found a workaround for this. -Pete -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users You mean when you type an address in the to field and the LDAP querrie comes up with who it is for? --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond What are you on about mate? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kretche, Peter Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 6:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Resolve hidden users In Exchange 5.5 it was possible to resolve a hidden user based on the Distinguished Name. Is it possible to do something similar with Exchange 2000? We have students who for one reason or another do not want to have their e-mail address published in the GAL. So far, I've only found articles talking about how Outlook resolves the user name based on the GAL. If anyone out there in Guru Land has some ideas or suggestions, I'm all ears. - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Resolve hidden users
You are correct with your first statement. We are trying to resolve a hidden user during the profile set up. All other users resolve just fine. -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users Your trying to resolve a hidden user. Is that the situation or is this now another problem? -Original Message- From: Kretche, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users Actually I'm trying to resolve the mailbox when the user opens Outlook. In the past we would put the Distinguished Name in the Mailbox: box in setting up the profile. Then by clicking Check Name, the name would resolve to the user's mailbox. Now that doesn't work and I was wondering if anyone found a workaround for this. -Pete -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users You mean when you type an address in the to field and the LDAP querrie comes up with who it is for? --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond What are you on about mate? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kretche, Peter Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 6:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Resolve hidden users In Exchange 5.5 it was possible to resolve a hidden user based on the Distinguished Name. Is it possible to do something similar with Exchange 2000? We have students who for one reason or another do not want to have their e-mail address published in the GAL. So far, I've only found articles talking about how Outlook resolves the user name based on the GAL. If anyone out there in Guru Land has some ideas or suggestions, I'm all ears. - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Resolve hidden users
That doesn't seem to work either. According to Q253828, the Recipient Update Service uses the msExchHideFromAddressLists attribute to build address lists and if this is set to TRUE, then it's not in an address book and then it can't be resolved. Ah well, I may just have to accept defeat on this one. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users So have you tried the LegacyExchangeDN yet? -Original Message- From: Kretche, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 12:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users You are correct with your first statement. We are trying to resolve a hidden user during the profile set up. All other users resolve just fine. -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users Your trying to resolve a hidden user. Is that the situation or is this now another problem? -Original Message- From: Kretche, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users Actually I'm trying to resolve the mailbox when the user opens Outlook. In the past we would put the Distinguished Name in the Mailbox: box in setting up the profile. Then by clicking Check Name, the name would resolve to the user's mailbox. Now that doesn't work and I was wondering if anyone found a workaround for this. -Pete -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Resolve hidden users You mean when you type an address in the to field and the LDAP querrie comes up with who it is for? --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond What are you on about mate? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kretche, Peter Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 6:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Resolve hidden users In Exchange 5.5 it was possible to resolve a hidden user based on the Distinguished Name. Is it possible to do something similar with Exchange 2000? We have students who for one reason or another do not want to have their e-mail address published in the GAL. So far, I've only found articles talking about how Outlook resolves the user name based on the GAL. If anyone out there in Guru Land has some ideas or suggestions, I'm all ears. - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: SPYWARE called WINWHATWHERE is not detected by ANTI-VIRUS
http://www.anti-keyloggers.com/ -Original Message- From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPYWARE called WINWHATWHERE is not detected by ANTI-VIRUS Too small, ever since HIPPA started gearing up our blocking list has grown to 78 items :o -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 9:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPYWARE called WINWHATWHERE is not detected by ANTI-VIRUS Reason Number 3842 to use The Blackstone Blocking list. Or at least .exe man! -Original Message- From: Muqeem Syed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 8:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SPYWARE called WINWHATWHERE is not detected by ANTI-VIRUS Dear All, Has anyone come across a spyware called winwhatwhere it was mailed to a user here and he opened it... It was programmed to capture the keystrokes for all passwords... and e-mailed as an attachment... Is there any reputable anti-virus that can actually detect such malicious spywares ... we have norton for exchange, and desktops and file and prin servers... it failed to detect it... furthermore when contacted we were informed that since it is a spyware... norton is designed to ignore such programmed.. like SPYWARE.. since it doesnt want the unsuspecting users to panic unneccessarily I did read about a software called bodetect that claims to stop this kind of programme and infact zonealarm informs the user ... anytime that this winwhatwhere attemtps to connect to the hotmail server on port 25 to stealthly send the email attachment and inform that a programmed was attempting to make an outgoing connection on port 25... .. but other than this personal firewall... are you folks aware of any software that can actually detect all spywares In case any one of you is interested.. just go to www.winwhatwhere.com regards _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scripting account creation
I'm trying to edit our user creation script to build Exchange 2000 accounts and I'm having some difficulty with CDOEXM. I keep getting the error There is no such object on the server. when I use the following code: set objmailbox = usr objmailbox.createmailbox LDAP://ADMINT/CN=Mailbox Store (MST),cn=First Storage Group,cn=InformationStore,cn=MST,cn=servers,cn=First Administrative Group,cn=Administrative Groups,cn=UW-Green Bay,cn=Microsoft Exchange,cn=services,cn=configuration,cn=uwgb,cn=edu This is a test domain, ADMINT is my DC and GC, MST is my Exchange Server. If anyone has any insight into this error, I would appreciate your thoughts. I've tried msdn.microsoft.com but the example scripts don't help (most have typos that make it even harder to decipher). - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade issue.
Recently we began our Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade and an issue has come up that wasn't discovered in testing. We have several users with hidden mailboxes for one reason or another. Most just want privacy and don't want their information available. Anyhow, under Exchange 5.5 with MAPI clients (Outlook 9x/2000/XP) we were able to resolve those hidden mailboxes by using Distinguished Name in a .prf file (i.e. /o=uwgreenbay/ou=uwgb/cn=recipients/cn=kretchep). However, we are finding when trying to resolve a name to an Exchange 2000 server using Distinguished Name in a profile, it does not work if the user is hidden. Has anyone found a way to resolve hidden mailboxes in Exchange 2000 or is this an issue that can not be worked around? - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade issue.
Ok, that attribute has the data I need, but how do I get the Outlook client to read it? - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Exchange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 3:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade issue. Typing is bad today: legacyExchangeDN -Original Message- From: Exchange Posted At: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 3:27 PM Posted To: Exchange Conversation: Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade issue. Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade issue. Try the legacyExchnageDN. -Original Message- From: Kretche, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 2:41 PM Posted To: Exchange Conversation: Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade issue. Subject: Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade issue. Recently we began our Exchange 5.5 to 2000 upgrade and an issue has come up that wasn't discovered in testing. We have several users with hidden mailboxes for one reason or another. Most just want privacy and don't want their information available. Anyhow, under Exchange 5.5 with MAPI clients (Outlook 9x/2000/XP) we were able to resolve those hidden mailboxes by using Distinguished Name in a .prf file (i.e. /o=uwgreenbay/ou=uwgb/cn=recipients/cn=kretchep). However, we are finding when trying to resolve a name to an Exchange 2000 server using Distinguished Name in a profile, it does not work if the user is hidden. Has anyone found a way to resolve hidden mailboxes in Exchange 2000 or is this an issue that can not be worked around? - Thank you, Pete Kretche MCP, A+ Network Systems Administrator University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (920) 465-5014 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook and Mandatory Profiles
Colin- We use oProfile (included in Office 2000) to keep user settings. The only 2 settings we can't keep is the mounting of additional mailboxes, and the adding of shortcuts to the shortcut bar. By the way, if anyone knows a fix for this, I would appreciate it. OProfile will create a .ops file ~800K in size. Hopefully your users have storage space on a server for this file, or point it to the floppy drive and have the users carry a settings disk that is read on logon. Pete -Original Message- From: Colin J Revell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 11:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook and Mandatory Profiles Thanks for that, I have altered the profgen switches ( remover the -U) and now I can get the name to stick, I just need to work out how to get the users changes to stick. My original note for this was 2. Customisations to Outlook (i.e. Outlook Shortcut Bar, and Views) are not retained when a users closes Outlook Colin -Original Message- From: Tristan Gayford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 November 2001 17:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook and Mandatory Profiles I misinterpreted the profile thing; too many profiles - one for 2000, one for Outlook ;-) www.slipstick.com may have some answers for q1 - With the standard check names I don't believe that you can do it, however. If you update an existing profile rather than replace one, you should be able to use the settings that reside on the remote drive. From distant memory, this is an option on profgen or modprof, but I haven't got my docs to hand at the moment. Tris - Deputy Systems Network Manager Cranfield University at Silsoe -Original Message- From: Colin J Revell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 November 2001 16:21 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook and Mandatory Profiles The problem is that we have a large number of software titles, and the software has to be changed often. I have over 1500 students that would need to have their profiles adjusted to contain new shortcuts etc. I have also been experiencing problems with profiles getting too big and then corrupting. This is instantly fixed with the mandatory profile. Colin - Colin J Revell B.Sc.(Hons) PGCE MCSE MCP+I Information Systems Manager, Oakham School -Original Message- From: Tristan Gayford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 November 2001 15:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook and Mandatory Profiles You could use policies to restrict the majority of the settings that users play around with. This would then do away with the need to run profgen every time they log on. Of course, you will still get the error once when they log on for the first time, but this is a necessary evil, I feel. An ADM file for the Outlook customisation settings in HKCU would do the trick and then added to the student GPO. Tris - Deputy Systems Network Manager Cranfield University at Silsoe -Original Message- From: Colin J Revell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 November 2001 14:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook and Mandatory Profiles I am running a Windows 2000 native mode network with Exchange 2000. All user workstations are Windows 2000 Pro. All users run a common mandatory profile, with folder redirection set up for My Documents, AppData and Desktop, that sends these items to their home directory. Each user has a copy of Default.PRF in their home directory that is used to configure Outlook 2000 as their mail client this is set up at logon using the profgen util. I need to continue to use mandatory profiles as the pupils have a tendency to adjust their settings. I have 2 problems; 1. Users who have logon initials that are similar to others (ie JW is similar to JWP) have to choose their mailbox name every time they go in to Outlook. Users with unique logon IDs do not have a problem. I need to get it to remember their mailbox name, once they have picked it from the list the first time. I have already tried editing the Default.PRF in the users home dir and replacing the initials with their full mailbox name, but this has no benefit. I had always assumed that all this information was kept in the application data folder. 2. Customisations to Outlook (i.e. Outlook Shortcut Bar, and Views) are not retained when a users closes Outlook. Thanks for any help, - Colin J Revell B.Sc.(Hons) PGCE MCSE(NT4) MCSE(Win2K) MCP+I Information Systems Manager, Oakham School, ICT Centre, Ashwell Road, Oakham, Rutland. LE15 6QG. The opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the individual and not necessarily of Oakham School. Oakham School does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been tampered with. Please be aware that messages sent over the Internet may not be secure and should not be seen as forming a legally binding contract unless otherwise stated. Without Prejudice.