Most of the messages I receive with special characters (except for a
few accented letters) in the subject are spam. Is there a way I can
filter for any message with a subject that contains characters in a
certain range, so that I can just dump messages with special
characters in the subject?
--
Jurgen Haug writes:
Fun is, when I installed that over a year ago, I needed to have
Outlook running to connect with TB!
What error message did you get when you attempted to run it without
Outlook?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5.25 on Windows
Can anyone point me to detailed information on how to configure The
Bat for an MSN e-mail account?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5.25 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2
Current version
Ben Allen writes:
Do you mean a hotmail or web based account?
I don't know. I'm asking the question for one of my relatives who
isn't even quite sure how he gets connected to the Internet, much less
what type of account he has. I presume it's a Web-based MSN account,
but I don't really
Ben Allen writes:
Well.. um... you only need to do it once, and I know of no way to
make it simpler.
My relative isn't going to be happy about that. Maybe I can still
persuade him.
Why move from web to pop btw?
Because I assumed that The Bat only handled POP, and not the
proprietary Web
Admin at AK writes:
I have been setting up a GMail account to use POP in TB.
In Transport for the account:
- Set SMTP Server to smtp.gmail.com
- Set SMTP Server Authentication to Perform SMTP Authentication (RFC
2554) and check Use settings of Mail Retrieval
- Set Connection to Secure to
Is this with STARTTLS or TLS for outgoing mail?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5.25 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2
Current version is 3.60.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
WilWilWil writes:
Truth or Bullshit ?
Gmail says so itself. They scan e-mail content with robots in order
to target advertising more effectively.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5.25 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2
WilWilWil writes:
In france, the official postal service, La Poste propose free
services for mail for free.
It's not free; it is paid for by taxes.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5.25 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2
WilWilWil writes:
I understand your point of view. But how a linux or an OpenOffice
is possible and reality, and not possible for a mail services ?
Most developers of free software are actually writing it at the
expense of their employers or schools (often without their consent).
Nothing is
WilWilWil writes:
But open source too... For the web site, the development
environment, for maintenance, support, etc... I think about mozilla
and firefox... How do they earn money ?
They are subsidized from other sources.
--
Anthony
__
Using
When I move to the previous message in a folder, TB wraps to the last
message in the folder if I'm already at the first message in the
folder. Is there a setting I can change to prevent this?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5.25 on Windows XP 5.1
Thomas Fernandez writes:
Doesn't TB behave as desired? What would you want it to do?
I'd prefer that it close the current message only, because there isn't
any previous message when you're positioned on the first message in
the folder.
An alternative would be to disable the previous-message
Roelof Otten writes:
So just use the preview to read your mail.
I don't want to use the preview to read my mail.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5.25 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2
John Phillips writes:
It seems to allow you to set up an account if using APOP verification,
whatever that is!
For what it's worth, I've been using TB with Gmail successfully for
some time, although it wasn't initially clear which options I had to
select.
--
Anthony
John Phillips writes:
Do you need to use a spam filter at all, or does Google do
that efficiently?
Since I do not publicize my Gmail account, I receive essentially no
spam on the account.
I don't filter incoming e-mail at all. I read everything. It's the
only way to avoid missing legitimate
Robert C Wittig writes:
Long time no see, Anthony!
Another happy user of TB, I gather?
This is true. I am in the habit of doing a full back-up of TB! daily,
to a secondary, data-only hard drive.
It worries me a bit that e-mail programs in general seem to make very
little provision for
Spike writes:
I have experienced a great loss due to an island-wide power failure
that lasted for just over 5 hours yesterday. I had the complete TBOT
and TBUDL lists going back about 4 years. The power failure lasted
longer than my UPS's and I LOST the entire mail folders for these
lists.
Jernej Simoncic writes:
Scandisk might have been the culprit - it's not a tool meant for NT/2k/XP
(though I have a hard time believing it ran at all - unless your disks use
FAT32).
Scandisk will run on XP, although it requires exclusive access to the
device, so if you run it, XP actually
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
Scandisk is not even part of XP.
Well, whatever it's called now ... I haven't run it in quite some
time.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5.25 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2
Spike writes:
I backup the entire 100GB drive weekly, but the failure happened a
few hours BEFORE the scheduled Sunday weekly backup. :-(
Well, the only real protection against this sort of thing is more
frequent backups. Otherwise, obviously you risk losing whatever
you've done since the
Is there a way to secure The Bat such that visitors can be allowed to
use a person's PC without having access to the owner's e-mail?
Windows XP does allow for separate user accounts and can even assign
permissions to files so that some files and folders are completely
inaccessible to users other
Stuart Cuddy writes:
If you password protect a specific account it is not possible for
another person without the password to access it even to read mail
that is already downloaded.
Even if that mail has been sorted into other folders by filters?
--
Anthony
Mary Bull writes:
Yes, to the best of my own experience. Unless you sorted it out to a
different TB! account or to a Common Folder--and I don't even know if
that's possible, never having tried it.
It's quite possible, as I sort _all_ my e-mail into common folders.
I just tried opening a
Mary Bull writes:
F-Secure automatically scans message bodies but not attachment
interiors. It will, however, scan the attachment if you click on it
and warn you if you've opened a worm or virus.
You can press F9 and look at the raw message and determine in a few
seconds if it's hazardous or
Maurice McAdam writes:
Are Word files (with possible macros) something I should worry about -
in other words, first download, and then scan every single attached
document ?
Word files are only dangerous if you open them with Word. If you want
to view them safely, you can download and install
Manuel Breitfeld writes:
Not for me, that's strange! Sorry, I never heard of any problems concerning
copying a text in the message source viewer.
Select the message header only in a folder, then press F9 to see the raw
text, and see if it lets you copy. It seems to be related to that.
--
Roelof Otten writes:
Because you need to select some text before you can copy anything.
I selected all the text.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Current version
Fredrik Bergström writes:
I had this problem on 3.5, but now on 3.5.25 it seems to be working
again, if I press F9, Edit / Select All and then Edit / Copy I get a
copy of all the text.
I thought 3.5 was the latest version.
--
Anthony
__
Using
Stuart Cuddy writes:
What version are you using.
What does my signature say?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Current version is 3.5.0.17 | 'Using TBUDL'
Chris writes:
That's the problem. In 3.5, there is a bug that prevents one from
doing what you are doing.
I thought 3.5 was a stable release.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Bill McCarthy writes:
Continuing its newly established tradition of releasing
unstable versions with missing features, Ritlabs
announced yesterday morning:
New version of The Bat!, 3.5.25, is available to download at
http://www.ritlabs.com/en/products/thebat/download.php
If Ritlabs wants
Stuart Cuddy writes:
Ah yes, I was looking for something longer, as in 3.5.25. Try
upgrading it fixes this problem.
I JUST FINISHED UPGRADING. THAT'S WHAT CAUSED THE PROBLEM.
I don't find bugs for free, sorry.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5
Why is the Copy option disabled when I look at the raw text of a message
with the F9 key? I used to be able to select and copy the raw text of a
message, which is sometimes necessary.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Manuel Breitfeld writes:
Hmm, I don't have any problems. F9 - View Message Source - Right-Click
context menu - Copy
Don't you see this menu?
I do on your message, but for other messages the copy option is
disabled. Is there anything about a message or any other conditions in
which the copy
I just upgraded to 3.5 from 3.0, and my filters don't seem to work the
way they used to. Filters that checked the recipient fields for a
specific address and moved the message to a specific folder no longer
seem to work; instead the messages are falling into a catch-all filter
at the end of the
MAU writes:
Can you copy (Ctrl+C) one of these filters and paste it (Ctrl+V) in a
message here so we can take a look?
TB! Message Filter
beginFilter
UID: [2D75BAD5.01C4C06A.1734AE5E.04E421D8]
Name: The\20Bat
Filter: {\0D\0A\20`5`15`^Reply-to:[EMAIL
MAU writes:
Filter:
{\0D\0A\20`5`15`^Reply-to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/5C.dutaint/5C.com\0D\0A}
This, in a more readable form is:
Header matches all as RegExp ^Reply-to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I seem to recall there were some issues with RegExp in latest
betas/releases. In any case, I would suggest
MAU writes:
Is your new filter active? It wasn't you you copied it.
It is now. In fact, it fires, but the message is not moved. I added an
action to change the color of the subject line, and it works, but the
message is not being moved. This is the current filter:
TB! Message Filter
Apparently it has something to do with arranging filters in a hierarchy.
Something has changed in the code. Can anyone tell me exactly what
changed, or should I just roll dice to figure it out?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5 on Windows XP 5.1
MAU writes:
Thos only strange thing I see is in your move action. The folder patch
starts with \\\ (3 of them) and I see that in my filters all of them
start with just two (\\). Can you try to edit this action and select the
folder again to see if it does make any difference?
All of the move
MAU writes:
Yes, of course. If a filter above the one in question is triggering and
is not set to Continue processing, the filter in question will not even
be tested.
But the filter _was_ being tested, and it _did_ trigger, because when I
put a change color action in the filter, it was
MAU writes:
OK, you should have mentioned from start that you were talking about
sub-filters.
At the beginning I had no particular reason to suspect the subfilter
structure, and therefore no reason to mention it.
Are you perhaps also talking about Common filters and
sub-filters?
Yes, I use
MFPA writes:
Are you sure? It is acknowledged in Stefan Tanurkov's note to the
bug report at https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4067 that
the plain text viewer does not support Unicode.
Well, I see the special Unicode characters in the message, and it's only
black-and-white text. And I
Is there a way for me to send messages in Unicode with TB? I need to
send stuff containing characters from the International Phonetic
Alphabet, and while I have the necessary Unicode fonts installed, I'm
not sure if there's a way to send Unicode in TB. I send only plain-text
messages with the
No, you can't Ritlabs ignore this Unicode issue :(
But TB _displays_ Unicode without any problem, it seems. So it just
can't generate it?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
MFPA writes:
At least one problem: TB! will not display it using the _plain_
text viewer. Annoying.
It seems to be displaying it for me, although it uses a proportional
font (Lucida Sans Unicode--I don't have any monospaced Unicode fonts).
--
Anthony
MFPA writes:
If I trust somebody, they are trusted.
The trust may, of course, be misplaced.
Exactly. By definition, someone must be trusted in every computer
system. Whether or not that person is really trustworthy is irrelevant
from a security standpoint; what matters in computer security
rich gregory writes:
There is NO SUCH THING as a trusted source, ever.
Yes, there is such a thing, depending on one's security policies.
For example, most operating systems consider any user with a valid
password for a given identifier to be a trusted user of that identifier.
--
Anthony
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
There was one incident that change my attitude towards this. I'm
normally using Opera, but in order to use some pages, as you surely
know, one must use Internet Explorer. One of these sites that require
IE *and* ActiveX is ebay when you want to sell something and use
Allie Martin writes:
It's ridiculous now and we simply have to run the software rather
than sit thinking that we alone can make the difference.
It only gets dangerous when you stop thinking.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP
Thomas Fernandez writes:
They are better than nothing.
Yes, but safe computing practices are better than A/V products, and they
are free and do not interfere with the functioning of the OS.
Firewalls have nothing to do with AV software.
They have a lot to do with safe computing, though. In
Thomas Fernandez writes:
Does this sounds arrogant (or elitaire) or is it just me?
Some people think the mere notion of people having computers at home is
arrogant and elitist.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Thomas Fernandez writes:
You are not in business or academy. In those fields, attached files
with macros are common.
I'm in both, and macro-laden files comprise only a tiny minority of
attached files.
Right. There is no 100% protection, if you need to open those files.
Often, you don't need
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
So, every Netsky virus that sends itself around with a fake sender address
would come from a trusted source by that definition.
Trusted sources are verifiable sources. Digital signatures come in
handy here.
--
Anthony
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
Impractical.
Not for me. I've used eBay without the need for ActiveX.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Current version is 3.0.1.33
Allie Martin writes:
From reading your other messages it would seem that your use of your
system and why *you* require or need allows you the luxury of being
able to simply avoid risky practices. More power to you that you're
able to actually do this. Unfortunately, this isn't practical
Thomas Fernandez writes:
My point is that some oneone who sent me uninfected files one day, may
send me an infected file the next.
Then that person is not a trusted source.
Not for me. Well, if they send me .exe files, I do ask them to send me
sensible files. But an Excel atttachment is
Allie Martin writes:
Nah. You're just able to avoid doing a lot of things others can't.
Most can avoid them; they just don't want to. The urge to see a video
of Paris Hilton is just too strong.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows
MFPA writes:
Tools | Options | Read tab | Read all messages in plain text
in OE 6; dunno about other versions.
I have OE 6, and I don't see any such option.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
MFPA writes:
Is there a risk to Flash?
Flash contains instructions that are executable on the local machine;
therefore there's always a risk.
There have been some reported virus infections of Flash content. I
don't have any legitimate use for Flash so I have no Flash software
installed.
I
Tim Casten writes:
it a feature in the sp2 version
Oh. Well, it was too little, too late, as I now use TB for my e-mail
(despite several annoying bugs). I haven't even installed SP2, since
I'm sure it will break applications, and I can't afford to spend
hundreds or thousands of dollars
Kevin Coates writes:
Most of us spend a fair amount of money on our hardware and Internet
access. Buying a decent AV package should be part of the process. Yes,
you can do it for free, but is it worth the risk?
If you don't open attachments, have a firewall, and don't run active
content on
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
Nonsense.
It has worked flawlessly for me for many years.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
That doesn't mean it will work for everyone else.
They do have to be diligent, yes.
But antivirus software doesn't work for everyone, either, and it can
cause lots of problems, as well as inducing a false sense of security.
--
Anthony
Melissa Reese writes:
The one thing that's getting very little mention here is the concept
of careful practices above and beyond any particular choice of AV/AT
and other types of protective software.
I've mentioned it.
Antivirus products, generally speaking, are inferior substitutes for
safe
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
You really believe this, do you?
Yes. As I've said, it has worked for me for many years.
Ever heard of the average Joe User?
Yes. So?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Melissa Reese writes:
...I have mixed feelings if a small caveat is not appended. While
*never opening any attachments* will indeed keep one relatively
safer than if one were to *never* open any attachment, if the
admonition to not open *any* attachment is taken too literally, the
usefulness
rich gregory writes:
Some of the users I support tend to not want, care or be able to
understand anything remotely like best practices. They include
several stages of youth and the elderly. Some are quite arrogant and
purposefully flaunt bad habits without regard to the dangers.
Then they
Peter Ouwehand writes:
Call me stupid, but what does OWA stand for ?? (yet Another Winblows
Application ??)
Outlook Web Access, I think ... the web-based client for Exchange.
I just can't seem to rime email and some web app from M$ to be being
called 'pretty nifty'.
It's only necessary to
John Phillips writes:
Just wondering if Bat! can handle high speed ADSL correctly. My standard
connect is 1.5 mb.
I connect to my own e-mail server on my LAN at speeds of 100 Mbps with
no trouble.
I have noticed at times that all messages are downloaded (info from the
connection centre) and
Thomas Fernandez writes:
In the office I also download mails from the LAN at 100MBps. No
corruption, even though the filtering (and status importing messages
is a couple of seconds slow. No problem.
How many filters do you have?
I have lots of filters and sometimes the filtering is so slow
Thomas Fernandez writes:
Over a hundred.
I don't have that many, but TB still falls behind on the filters (as far
as I can tell).
30 seconds is very often. What do you need that for?
It's not often at all on a 100 Mbps network. It costs nothing and I get
my e-mail in nearly real time that
John Phillips writes:
Do you have trouble with 3.01.33 losing mail on your lan?
Offhand, I can't remember ever losing any e-mail ... even when TB has
crashed. When I start it back up, the messages are all there.
However, it faults with enormous frequency now (dozens of times a day,
Thomas Fernandez writes:
Try checking every 2 minutes and see whether the problem persists.
OK.
Can you this AV here? the numbers won't tell me anything, but they
might tell somebody something.
I'll try to take a screen shot the next time I see it.
--
Anthony
Is there a way to log the POP3 exchanges that take place when The Bat
checks e-mail? I notice that it always lingers for 30 seconds or more
on the last account it checks during a mail check cycle, and I want to
know why. If I try to reference a message that it has fetched from this
last account
Peter Meyns writes:
See above. It is obvious, that interfering in the import process may
produce a conflict.
Perhaps, but that conflict should not produce an address violation. If
there is a conflict, TB shouldn't show the messages in the folder until
they are actually available for viewing.
Wolffe writes:
In the account directory for the specific mailbox
(ie C:\programs\thebat\mail\yahoo), create the file protocol.ini and
populate it with these settings:
[pop]
logging=0
log=pop.log
[smtp]
logging=0
log=smtp.log
[imap]
logging=0
log=imap.session
Where logging 0=off
Can TB be configured to access MSN e-mail accounts? If so, what are the
required parameters?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Current version is 3.0.1.33 |
Tony Boom writes:
Does MSN support pop or IMAP access? If so then TB! should be able to access
it.
Fine, but with what parameters (servers, settings, etc.)?
Yes, MSN (the paying version) supposedly supports POP3/SMTP clients.
--
Anthony
__
Marck D Pearlstone writes:
If the images are references to online images, The Bat! (quite
correctly, and this is not scheduled to be changed) will not go online
to download extras not sent with an email. To download such images is
a breach of TB's security model and those email programs that
I think there is a problem handling incoming messages that contain
invalid e-mail addresses or nothing at all in the From field (and
possibly the Sender field).
I hae a Perl script that generates feedback and guest-book messages and
it allows visitors to not provide an e-mail address. I've
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
local tree - sounds like you're using IMAP?
No. There's a tree of folders with Local at the top. It's not IMAP.
If you mean the common folders (that don't belong to an account) ...
Yes, I suppose that's what they are called.
... they have account settings too,
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
H - you named them yourself local, did you?
I don't know. What is the top folder on the tree named by default?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
I don't know - here, there is no top folder. My common folders are on the
same level as the account's top folders.
Well, what is the top folder called in the common folder tree?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33
Mary Bull writes:
Here is the way my folder looks, reading vertically, top down:
The account name, m.bull. Moving right, Inbox, with numerous
subfolders. Below it, Outbox, Sent Mail, and Trash. Below that the
names of my only two Common folders, TBUDL Archive and TBBETA Archive.
I don't
Peter Meyns writes:
Yes, it's in Account Properties -- Options.
I already have the time set to zero (see attached screenshot), but
there's still a pause after I open the message.
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build
Julian Beach (Lists) writes:
I thought that zero meant never marked unread, but I could be wrong.
Try blank, as this seems to mark as read immediately.
I tried blank--same effect. But I'm looking at folders in the Local
tree; are they influenced by the account settings? If not, where do I
If I open a message and keep it open for a few seconds, the message is
marked as read in its folder. Is this delay configurable?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Sometimes we I look at the source of a message with F9, I see only a
part of the message. Can anyone tell me why this is the case?
Check out the screen shots below. This was some sort of spam message I
received; I tried to look at the source to see if it contained anything
suspicious, but the
Ivan writes:
Very strange screen shots.
They are taken directly from the message windows. What's strange about
them?
Can you upload or send directly EML-file?
I think it's gone ... I looked for it just now and I think I deleted it
(I delete over 1100 spams a day, so I tend to do it
Ivan writes:
I'm about content, of course. :)
I assume it was some sort of spam message--that's why I was looking at
the source (if a message seems to be on the borderline, I check the
source to see if it has any nasty content before I actually open it to
look further).
I think there was
Ivan writes:
You didn't provide us with EML.
So I don't know exactly.
And we cannot reproduce situation.
If I come across it again I'll save the message (I know I've seen it
before, although it seems to be less common with V 3.x).
--
Anthony
How do I get a filter to check _every_ Content-type header in a message
for specific content, instead of just the first one?
Right now I have header match ^Content-type:.*multipart/alternative.*
but it only seems to fire if the first Content-type header matches this;
subsequent Content-type
How do I get a filter to check _every_ Content-type header in a message
for specific content, instead of just the first one?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600
Can I move a message from the inbox of one account to the inbox of
another account such that the filters of the latter account continue to
filter the message?
The idea is to set up a large number of filters on only one inbox for
one account, and then set up a single filter for the other accounts
Roelof Otten writes:
That's why v3 has common filters, then you'd need only one set of
filters.
I've just discovered that. Is there a way I can cut and paste the
entire list of filters for one account into the common filters, or do I
have to cut and paste each filter individually? I tried
Is there a way for me to renew my Verisign digital ID and install it so
that TB uses it for S/MIME messages? If so, can someone point me to a
step-by-step procedure?
I've been thinking of renewing my Verisign ID for correspondents who
have only S/MIME, but since I've stopped using Outlook
Alexander S. Kunz writes:
Pal, with statements that ridiculous I don't dare continuing this OT
conversation, sorry. I mean... no, I don't mean... you haven't been there,
so I'll just stop here... :-)
I used to do technical support, and that's a standard question, along
the lines of have you
I notice that the references are growing and growing in messages that I
exchange with other people via replies (I reply, he replies, I reply, he
replies). Is there any way to put an upper limit on the number of
references included in the headers for continuing replies like this?
I think it may
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
