Re: Any value in this list ?
Well, though this may not be a topic for this list, I also want to add my 2 eurocent here (:-) . First, I'm neither a MS hater nor a MS lover. Actually this company is responsible for a lot of fun I had especially in the last 12 months when I red their comments about open software and especially Linux (please don't let us enter the philosophical discussion here, if Linux and/or Linux/390 is open software or not). However, the problem here is NOT a MS problem. If we assume that 20,000 people are subscribed to this list, then 20,000 computers have to run senseless filters to get rid of the crap mail. My opinion is, if only one (1) computer runs this filters (the listserver itself), this is much much more efficient than anything else. You may say, this doesn't help against spam and viruses mailed directly to you. Though you are right, this is a completely different quality of disturbing people at work. Sending just ONE mail to a list may disturb and waste time of 100,000's of people and waste CPU-time of 100,000's of computers. This is definitely not necessary, because the listserver itself could easily throw away this crap. Therefore I still say: this is NOT Microsofts fault, this is a bad behaviour of the listserver, and again EVERY listserver's default behaviour should be: .) Throw silently away mails containing viruses, .) Throw silently away mails containing the string [spam in the subject. This would save lots of bandwidth for the Internet, and save lots of CPU cycles of computers all over the world. My 2 ec, Herbert At 23:18 30/07/2001, Mark Durham wrote: Theodore Tso wrote: On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 08:17:48AM -0700, Mark Durham wrote: I'm doing the same. This is situation is absurd, and an embarrassment to the IETF. Those I've mentioned it to (some of whom are *very* active in WGs) just shook their heads in amazement. Personally, I'd say it's an embarassment to *Microsoft*. Let's allocate blame where it properly belongs. They were the ones who made the mail reader which made these sorts of viruses possible - Ted Well, yes, and point taken. For that matter, you can take it even further upstream and blame Satan for all the world's evils, thereby washing your hands of the whole mess. Obviously, Redmond is ultimately culpable here (along with those who exploit their little loopholes); and, on the downstream side, list subscribers must ultimately watch out for their own interests. But moral superiority and libertarian ethics aside, the list manager seems to be in an excellent position to solve this problem. Still, if that's an unacceptable infringement of recipients' autonomy, so be it. Some people make a strong argument for running an open relay, too (though I don't buy that one either). In any case, embarrassment was probably the wrong word, though I still think absurd fits. But I do agree re: Microsoft. And my apologies for being so ill-tempered.
Re: Any value in this list ?
At 14:35 31/07/2001, Keith Moore wrote: Therefore I still say: this is NOT Microsofts fault so what you are saying is that it's the job of the network to not deliver any content to you that you don't want to see, and for the network to somehow figure that out in advance, so that you're never inconvenienced? no matter how much trash other network sites send your way? A listserver is not the network (actually I don't see anything which IS the network). A listserver is just a more or less dumb server which serves 1000's, possibly 100,000's of users. As mentioned, I don't see any problem to add a virus-scanner and a short script to the listserver to discard virus-attachments and spams. Though it will not find everything, it will enhance the situation a lot. I especially don't like the way one company is lynched for every software problem in the world. I use a mail client who filters all these virus informations from this list into the trash and marks them read. Every mailclient can do that (possibly Outlook cannot, I don't know and I don't care, because I don't use it). BUT: this is not the job of my PC and not the job of 10,000's of other PC's running any OS with any mailclient you can think of. It's the job of the server who spreads these mails around (because it seems to be too difficult to put the childish or silly guys into jail, who have enough time to waste in their life to create such mails). And I think it's an easy job, and there are no emotions necessary. /Herbert (this list being a special case of the network) presumably the network should also accomodate everyone else's desires for filtering also, all at the same time? and presumably you're also willing to tolerate the network making incorrect decisions, say 10% of the time, and either inappropriately blocking or inappropriately admitting a message that you don't want to see? and you're willing to accept the amount of complexity/state that must be absorbed by the network, and the corresponding loss of reliability and scalability, and the increase in operational cost? and you're willing to have the network shoulder this responsibility no matter how poorly the software at the endpoints is written, and no matter how vulnerable it is to attack by miscreants? seems to me that it's attitudes like that that produce products like the SMTP firewall that currently sits in front of odin.ietf.org (and counteless other SMTP servers) which prevents SMTP from working properly. separation of function, scalability, reliability, and proper operation be dammed - what's most important is that no garbage get through. the end-to-end argument is completely discarded because we have no way of forcing Microsoft to produce reliable software or to accept responsibility for its negligence. Keith hmmm. maybe the snail-mail service's mail sorters could automatically detect and discard junk mail. and maybe the phone network could altomatically detect telemarketers and electrocute them... it does have a certain appeal to it.
Any value in this list ?
Hi All, if there is still somebody reading email to this list, I would be interested if they see any value in being a part of this list. 95% of email to this list are virus infected, and therefore deleted automatically by my mailserver, and I'm tired of filtering all the virus messages to the trash. Normally the listserver should just delete such messages without any information to the list itself. Because the listserver doesn't do that (which I think should be a standard behaviour of every listserver) I just unsubscribed from this rubbish. /Herbert PS: My opinion about the default behaviour of every well administered listserver is: .) Delete silently and don't forward ANY message with a virus attachment. .) Delete silently and don't forward ANY message with the uppercased string [spam in the subject. At 11:47 30/07/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Incident Information:- Originator:Manh Chau Nguyen[EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipients:[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: dem-rep-sal WARNING: The file dem-rep-sal.doc.com you received was infected with the W32/SirCam@MM virus. The file attachment is not delivered.
