You can also use a different type of field on the read page. Use the radio
buttons on the compose page but use a label control on the read page. It
shows the information but enforces that the user cannot make any changes.
(Easier than coding or marking the fields as read-only.)
Scott
It does sound like a Front-end/Back-end ... if so, make sure you are using basic
(clear text) authentication... it won't work without it. Are you getting any error
messages in your event log ?
I'd be very wary of opening up Port 80 on my firewall... have you considered using SSL
as well ?
If you've got the cash look at DirXML from Novell
Regards,
Mylo
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 27 February 2002 22:37
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: bringing it all together
Avaliable options I'm aware of:
1. Compaq LDAP Directory
This one is giving me a headache -- I have Exch 5.5 running on a Win2k
server. I'm looking for the fine print that tells me which patch to apply
first, or at all, if any, or both. Your mileage may vary. Sigh.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
I think the two patches are independent of each other.
Phil
-
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK
-Original Message-
From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 February 2002 12:22
To: Exchange
Its a good thing I'm still on DOS 4.0
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 9:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: FW: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
-Original Message-
From: Russ
quote
Does the vulnerability affect the SMTP service in Exchange Server 5.5?
No. Exchange 5.5, even if installed on Windows 2000, uses its own SMTP
service, which is not affected by the vulnerability
/quote
Siegfried /
-Original Message-
From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Eeek, wasn't that the buggy one? ;-)
Phil
-
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 February 2002 12:42
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:
bowing to superior intellect My gosh, Siefried! You must be AWAKE
ALREADY!!! /bowing and scraping
-Original Message-
From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 8:14 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin -
You're kidding, eh?
It is 2:24 p.m. here and I am working since 5 a.m. this morn.
Siegfried /
-Original Message-
From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 2:20 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
Here is how I see it. You cant have both (well you can, but with tweaking)
on the same box.
You either have the IMS, or the SMTP service. Unless you have a separate IMS
server, you should probably use 011.
Remember, one specific task in the white paper for installing Exch55 on a
W2K server was to
What are the GW and SM users using for clients?
-Original Message-
From: Williams Scott CTR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 1:09 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Major Migration Question:
I've been detailed to an assignment that will involve a
If you look close to both, MS02-011 MS02-012, you'll see that they
both point to the same patch for Windows 2000.
Only MS02-011 includes a patch for the Exchange 5.5 IMS, not MS02-012.
You can have both, Exchange 5.5 IMS Windows 2000 SMTP, on the same
machine. All you need to do is either:
E In place upgrade :)
I did say you could have both. With tweaking just as you explained.
But in place upgrades don't exist in my world, so that is why I do it the MS
way.
Just different ways of doing things. Right?
-Original Message-
From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL
ACK. Problem is that smaller companies sometimes can't afford to buy a
new machine. Hence they must do in place. But in my world in place
doesn't exist either ;-)
Actually, I remember back in Exchange 2000 RC1 times in Feb 2000 I
started with each new beta build from scratch: Beta 3 = RC1 = RC2
::runs screaming from room:: :)
But some of us know you are the man. I wouldn't trust some folks with that!
-Original Message-
From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 5:53 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security
Sounds like a catastrophe waiting to happen. My concern is that if the
custom recipient is unavailable where does this Archive folder exist that is
suppose to be created exist. I've never heard of anyone journalling to a
customer recipient but to a specific mail box on an Exchange server.
Hi,
E2K,
Win2K
Some of our email users have more then one email adress, e. g.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stoewer is the last name, so it should be the default adress when sending email for
the company.
I set it as default adress in AD to [EMAIL PROTECTED] But Exchange/AD changes
But it's only THURSDAY!
-Original Message-
From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 8:25 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
You're kidding, eh?
It is 2:24 p.m. here and I am working since 5
SimpleSync, Compaq LDSU and Microsoft Metadirectory Services can all do it.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
Atlanta, GA
-Original Message-
From: RB [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
Is there one for exchange 2k? I know on 5.5 there is a 32k limit.
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe:
Actually, beta 3 was Oct 1999 but I never but /that/ build into
production :)). Started with RC1 in my production lab [1].
However, Exchange 2000 runs fine so far. It's already getting boring
messing always with this old stuff. Can't wait until the next beta comes
out in the future [2].
Yes, the same
Yours,
Julian Stone
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 February 2002 14:28 pm
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Rules limit
Is there one for exchange 2k? I know on 5.5 there is a 32k limit.
It is? I lost track of that this week. Too much work and less time.
Siegfried /
-Original Message-
From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 3:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
But it's
Thank you Sir.
-Original Message-
From: Julian Stone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 9:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Rules limit
Yes, the same
Yours,
Julian Stone
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL
The explanation is:
The limit is imposed by RPC. An RPC packet can only be 32k.
Rules are requested through MAPI as a single folder property.
There is no facility to stream such a property across RPC packets.
Yours,
Julian Stone
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael
Not exactly. We are not running Exchange on the new proxy server, just
win2k, IIS, and ISA.
We are able to access OWA on the Exchange server from internal clients with
no problems by addressing it directly: http://exchangeservername/exchange;
Problem is trying to get to OWA via the new
Well, the M: drive was just a symptom. The actual problem was OWA not
working unless I added an extra SMTP address to each user, which I didn't
really want to do.
But anyway, Ed, you pointed me in the right direction. I already had a
recipient policy with the desired @kimball.com SMTP address,
Hi, I have a user who wants to synchronise his Laptop, on which he
uses Eudora, with his desktop (OL97).
At the moment, what happens is that eudora wants to load all messages in
his mailbox (too much) and then there is still no synchronisation...
What can I do?
Is there any way to export and import MSX 5.5 object permissions?
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe:
How do you have all the settings in the Exchnage page in IIS. Try adding
your domain as the default domain, even though it may be set to default.
Not exactly. We are not running Exchange on the new proxy server, just
win2k, IIS, and ISA.
We are able to access OWA on the Exchange server from
Are you running the import routine for Outlook that gives you this result.
Does his current settings on Eudora keep a copy of emails on the server? If
not make it so. This way he can use Outllok then. Best is to get him off of
Eudora. It's cute but isn't made to integrate with all of the MS
What are you trying to accomplish?
Is there any way to export and import MSX 5.5 object permissions?
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:
the guy swears by Eudora and is going on about the fact that in Eudora
you can include the original message in the out of office function...
I'm thinking about creating a second mailbox and forward new incoming
mail to that new mailbox and keep a copy on the old one, in that way he
can configure
Make sure you have the correct email domain set as the primary in your email
addresses page of the default recipient policy.
Hi,
E2K,
Win2K
Some of our email users have more then one email adress, e. g.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stoewer is the last name, so it should be the
In preparation for moving to E2K, we want to change all of our non-human
objects (shared mailboxes, conf rooms, etc.) so that they have their own NT
user ID.
I can export, create the NT4 user ID and re-import with the newly created ID
as the primary windows account, BUT I then need some way to
Hello everybody--
We have a native Windows 2000 (SP2) network, with an Exchange 2000 (SP2) server. When
they connect to OWA from home, using IE 5.5 or 6 on a Windows 98 or 2000 box, they get
three boxes to fill in: Username, Password, Domain.
I have two users who have Windows XP computers at
format is:
domain\username
password
-Original Message-
From: Rob Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 February 2002 15:28
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: XP on 2000 Network
Hello everybody--
We have a native Windows 2000 (SP2) network, with an Exchange 2000 (SP2)
server. When
I think it might be a XP-Home edition has no domain authentication
issue. Check TechNet?
Regards,
Joe Bauschek - Network Engineer
Medical Information Management Systems LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Rob Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday,
username@domain
password
-Original Message-
From: HANNA, Keith (TSL Shirley) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:24 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: XP on 2000 Network
format is:
domain\username
password
-Original Message-
From: Rob Moore
Thanks. I'll have my users try that.
Rob
-Original Message-
From: HANNA, Keith (TSL Shirley) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:24 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: XP on 2000 Network
format is:
domain\username
password
-Original Message-
In IIS on the OWA server, you could also set the default domain. Then
everyone would just get a Username and a password box.
-Original Message-
From: HANNA, Keith (TSL Shirley) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 7:24 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: XP
That sounds like a good way to go. How do I do that?
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:43 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: XP on 2000 Network
In IIS on the OWA server, you could also set the default
Why don't you just make new default recipient policies as needed?
i.e. It looks like your default is @cyberconsult.de. That would give [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Make a new one (which would automatically take precedence for all users that the query
captures) that lists first
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and
That's not how it works. You're still sorta confused.
Your users need an SMTP address that matches that specified in the
default recipient policy. Period. M: drive will also reflect the
changes, but it's not the lead indicator.
-Original Message-
From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL
You can script that. It isn't easy, though.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet
Sent:
Have you followed the steps in the TechNet articles on fronting Exchange
with Proxy?
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Avaliable options I'm aware of:
1. Compaq LDAP Directory Synchronization Utility (LDSU)
2. Microsoft Metadirectory Server
3. SimpleSync
4. MS Mail Dirsync (unsupported by Microsoft, but is supposed to work)
5. InterOrg tool
6. Your own code
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech
Also seems like it could dramatically slow, if not stop, performance.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
You haven't looked hard enough. Look in the Recipient Policies
container.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
The hole is that it isn't synchronization. It's simply downloading his
mail to his offline client while it stays on the server. Changes he
makes to the downloaded mail on Eudora, or mail he sends from Eudora,
will not be in his mailbox unless he copies himself, and even then won't
be in the
Seeing as he lives in Germany, he has the benefit of a few time zones..
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
Atlanta, GA
-Original Message-
From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
Todd, this only from 5.5 to 2k. We will be consolidating all 5.5 org's to 1
5.5 ORG. Also 3 Groupwise 5.5 and 1 SendMail. Any utils exist that can do
all three?
-Original Message-
From: ToddMicro, Inc. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 10:49 PM
To:
Both Outlook or Exchange client. All SendMail data is in .PST's on the
workstations (dumb!), all GW is Server based.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 8:34 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Major Migration
I'm not sure what you are asking for. We have many mailboxes (400 or so) for
things like shared mailboxes, rooms, projectors, etc. Most of these have a
human owner's NT account plugged into the primary NT account. Many have
additional permissions assigned. Since this don't fly in E2K, we want to
Ed,
Aren't those only MetaDirectory consolidation tools? We are looking for a
migration tool that will migrate ALL date (ie: Public Folders, All Exchange
data, All Groupwise mail/data, and SendMail mail.
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday,
Try Easy Migrator from Wingra Technologies
http://www.wingra.com
Yours,
Julian Stone
-Original Message-
From: Williams Scott CTR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 February 2002 15:59 pm
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange Migration Question
Todd, this only from 5.5
IMAP
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
Atlanta, GA
-Original Message-
From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:07 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Wingra will do all that and a little more. You will want to call them
to get all the gory details. The site isn't as detailed as it should
be.
Joel
-Original Message-
From: Williams Scott CTR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:04 AM
To: Exchange
I'm stoked! I think this may be the solution to my migraine headaches!
-Original Message-
From: Stidley, Joel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:09 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange Migration Question
Wingra will do all that and a little
Is anybody else getting automated replies from Cooking.com everytime they post to the
Exchange list?
Also, on my previous thread, Martin Blackstone said, In IIS on the OWA server, you
could also set the default domain. Then everyone would just get a Username and a
password box.
I went to the
I have found it better to manage these as PF's over a mailbox. It removes
the need to have a dedicated account for each resource, and rights are easy
to setup.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:02 AM
To: Exchange
I don't doubt I'm confused, but didn't you just say the same thing I said?
It boils down to this: the *default* recipient policy must match one of the
SMTP addresses of the users. If it don't, OWA won't work. You can add all
the recipient policies you like, but it's the default policy that
Yeah I'm getting them to.
-Original Message-
From: Rob Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:11 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Cooking.com Replies?
Is anybody else getting automated replies from Cooking.com everytime they
post to the Exchange
Yes. We are getting those too. I blame it on an idiot. I don't know which
one though.
-Original Message-
From: Rob Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 8:11 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Cooking.com Replies?
Is anybody else getting automated
Weird. I blame all our problems on the same guy(s).
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:20 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Cooking.com Replies?
Yes. We are getting those too. I blame it on an idiot. I don't
I got two. Before the sender address ended up in my killfile...
Siegfried /
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 5:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Cooking.com Replies?
Yeah I'm getting them to.
You do know that you only get a logon dialog when using Basic
Authentication, don't you? With Windows Integrated Authentication there
is no reason for a default domain because the user credentials are
passed from IE to IIS.
Siegfried /
-Original Message-
From: Rob Moore [mailto:[EMAIL
I gone one although it was in response to a post to the NT 2000 list.
Paul Chinnery
Network Administrator
Mem Med Ctr
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:19 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Cooking.com
If integrated Auth. is shut off and a domain name is typed in he won't be
asked for a domain name.
You do know that you only get a logon dialog when using Basic
Authentication, don't you? With Windows Integrated Authentication there
is no reason for a default domain because the user credentials
Did you read the message to which I replied?
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Williams Scott
CTR
Sent:
Oh, ok I think you misunderstood me. Currently we are using a PERL script
to consolidate 9 different e-mail GAL's. Because of this, it has been
mandated that we go to ONE CONSOLIDATED e-mail system (Exchange 5.5). So
I'm looking for a do it all utility that will migrate all exchange
orgs/data,
Ayup! Kinda makes you wanna rush right out and sign a contract with them,
doesn't it? ;o)
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 5:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Looking for 3rd level messaging engineer
ROFL!
Right. This is the so-called Basic Authentication. In this case you
either can enter the default logon domain in IIS (or, if using Exchange
2000 - ESM) or just enter \ to enable UPN style logons in a Windows
2000/Exchange 2000 environment.
Siegfried /
-Original Message-
From: Tony
Hi there
I actually have XP professional at home, and I get the same thing (only
username and password box). The way that I get in all the time is:
domain\username
password
Hope this helps
Thanks
Russell
-Original Message-
From: Bauschek, Joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
I am using Exchange 5.5 SP4
Under Public folders I have the following folders in this configuration:
Public Folders
- Favorites
- All Public Folders
- Internet Newsgroups
This was the default setup. I want to add folders under Public Folders and I
was to remove the All Public Folders
Well, yes, we're on the same page just saying it differently. You're
right, Ken.
By the way, this doesn't apply if you make a new http virtual server to
serve the other domain. Then you don't have to go giving them a fake
email address.
-Original Message-
From: Ken Cornetet
One of our users is getting the following message when she sends our updated
intranet web page to the everyone group in our firm.
However, everyone is getting the page she is sending, no one has complained
that they are not ( this is something which is done at certain time daily).
I checked the
Have one of the web guys in our department with the following problem...any
ideas? I asked him the following questions when he said that every time he
tries to send a message, he gets the error below.
1. What error message are you getting? The operation failed with an OK
box. Nothing else.
Requested mail action aborted: exceeded storage allocation
What part is unclear? The recipient's mailbox is full.
-Original Message-
From: Pillai, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 9:18 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: NDR
One of our users is
This one is too easy Jim. Start outlook with the cleanreminders switch.
It's a corrupted appointment. Run that switch until the operation failed
message stops, and a gazillion reminders appear.
-Original Message-
From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday,
Doesn't look like the whole NDR there either. Had you posted the whole
thing, we could probably tell you exactly who has a full mailbox. But it's
not unclear at all - someone has a full mb.
-Original Message-
From: Pillai, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28,
TECH BRIEFING
Want To See Something Scary?
I thought you might be interested in trying this and then see your hair
stand out. When I tried it just now (Wednesday Feb 27, 11am) it still
worked. It's real too, yikes. This web page opens up a DOS box on your
computer. Someone really
1Recipient = the Everyone group (220 users).
2 Incorrect NDR, Recipients are getting the message.
3 No limit set to mailbox size, using information store defaults.
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:23 AM
To:
William would like to recall the message: NDR
Can you post the entire NDR?
W
-Original Message-
From: Pillai, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 9:32 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: NDR
1Recipient = the Everyone group (220 users).
2 Incorrect
Honest, it is the whole NDR.
-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: NDR
Doesn't look like the whole NDR there either. Had you posted the whole
thing, we could probably tell you
Scott that is not a vulnerability. Its called active scripting. If you turn
it off then www.cnn.com won't load properly either. Its a common integration
feature. If you want to disable it properly IE security should have been
set-up properly to begin with. Change your internet zone security to
Is this the sort of error that might occur if the SENDER's limit has been
reached, but Restrict Sending hasn't been selected?
-- Drew
Visit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!
There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. --
Thanks Lori...as usual, you're a sweetheart! :o)
-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 9:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Weird message from Outlook client
This one is too easy Jim. Start outlook with the
What does this have to do with Exchange, specifically?
The HTML is calling a local program. For this exploit to work there has to
be either a) a downloaded piece of malware to be called in this fashion or
b) the called program has to accept command-line strings.
For (a), there should be none on
Yeah, but how many networks do you know that have custom IE security
settings? Granted there are a few fixes for this, but to call exe's through
java, you basically can do anything you want on that PC. I'm no code guru
so I'm not aware of the capabilities, but it doesn't help with virus
Well, I would think you could call different command line scripts, not sure
of Outlook/OE, or any other e-mail application supports sending e-mail from
a command line. It relates to Exchange because 98% of viruses are
propagated by e-mail.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault
Scott I didn't say customize the sec settings in IE I simply stated that
setting them to HIGH (which what they should be for untrusted sites)would
not enable that page to work.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Williams Scott
CTR
Sent:
Why???
Favorites is extremely useful.
Phil
-
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK
-Original Message-
From: Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 February 2002 16:47
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Public
Gee better book my reservation for the entire month to play it safe.
Learn about the latest Symantec product news, services, partnerships,
events and more.
Announcing SecureXchange 2002, Symantec's WorldWide Users' Conference
This year's conference will be October 79, 2002 in Washington,
As far as permissions are concerned, I think that you would want to do it in
Outlook. If you need to give someone Send As permissions for the folder then
you would do that in the admin console.
I don't think that you can delete the All Public Folders and I wouldn't
remove Favorites.
Ken Powell
You can't remove the ALL Public Folders, this is the top level folder
structure for Public Folders. As for the Favorites, there may be a reg hack
for that.
-Original Message-
From: Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Hi there
Actually, this looks like glorified spam!! Pretty cute move, eh??
Thanks
Russell
-Original Message-
From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Cooking.com Replies?
Right. This is the
MSX5.5, SP4
Hi
Seems that our Exchange server is being used by externals to sent messages
like spam, what do we need to do to allow just our three domains *.com to
send messages out?
tia
=er
_
List posting FAQ:
In IIS admin go to your Web Site container (Default Web Site, or whatever
you named it to) and in the panel on the right scroll down to Exchange.
Right click on that and choose Properties and then Directory Security.
Then under Anonymous Access and Authentication Control choose Edit.
In there
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
