-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Andrey!
On Wednesday, May 02, 2001 at 5:27:53 AM you wrote:
Wonderful! :-E. Have you ever heard of the program called Registry
Editor (regedit.exe - for Win 9x/ME, regedit.exe/regedt32.exe for the
Win NT4/2K)?
Most users don't touch it,
Hi Wayne,
On Tue, 01 May 2001 18:53:57 -0700GMT (02/05/01, 09:53 +0800GMT),
Wayne Black wrote:
ACM HKCU/Software/rit/The Bat! and go the following entry:
ACM ProtectDisableOpen
ACM Already listed is HAPPY99.EXE,LOVELETTER*.VBS,*.PIF,*.SCR,*.SHS
WB Can you simply enter *.* here to prevent any
Hi Allie,
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 08:25:38 -0500GMT (29/04/01, 21:25 +0800GMT),
A Curtis Martin wrote:
MDP 3) This TB hole was plugged in 1.52/beta/10 (IIRC).
MDP /moderator
GFS So! Are we all supposed to be running Beta versions now? What the
GFS H E double Hockey-Stix?
ACM No. Marck is just
Hi ztrader,
On Tue, 1 May 2001 18:38:26 -0700GMT (02/05/01, 09:38 +0800GMT),
ztrader wrote:
BM Ritlabs should have notified its clients and had a reg edit
BM executable on its site for download.
Notify the clients of what? I will reply to this despite Marck's Dead
Horse (which I deliberately
Hi Ben,
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:50:06 -0400GMT (01/05/01, 07:50 +0800GMT),
Ben Mills wrote:
BM This PR fiasco will haunt them for a long time.
Them? You mean Kasparksy? ;-)
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Anmeldung unter:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Silviu,
On Tuesday, May 01, 2001 at 08:28:16 +0300, Silviu Cojocaru [SC] wrote
concerning 'Warning! First worm that hits TB! too...':
SC Lets hope RIT makes that an option, we don't have to hack our
SC way in the system like that. I hate the
Hallo David,
Mitteilung vom Mittwoch, 2. Mai 2001, 11:25:01:
DvZ Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
This line should be (on Windows NT 4):
REGEDIT4
DvZ [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\RIT\The Bat!]
DvZ ProtectDisableOpen=HAPPY99.EXE,LOVELETTER*.VBS,*.PIF,*.SCR,*.SHS
DvZ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Dierk,
On 02 May 2001 at 08:56:07 +0200 (which was 07:56 where I live)
Dierk Haasis wrote to Andrey G. Sergeev (AKA Andris) and made these
points:
Wonderful! :-E. Have you ever heard of the program called Registry
Editor (regedit.exe - for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Ben,
On 02 May 2001 at 23:54:09 -0400 (which was 04:54 where I live) Ben
Mills wrote to ztrader and made these points:
BM In short: I can't imagine Ritlabs wishes to remain an obscure
BM little enterprise hoping to keep its deficiencies mum on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Bernhard,
On Wednesday, May 02, 2001 at 11:47:29 +0200, Bernhard Kohl [BK] wrote
concerning 'Warning! First worm that hits TB! too ..':
DvZ Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
BK This line should be (on Windows NT 4):
BK REGEDIT4
Yes
Wednesday, May 02, 2001, 6:40:06 AM, Andrey G. Sergeev (AKA Andris) wrote:
Hello!
Tuesday, May 01, 2001, 9:28:16 AM, Silviu Cojocaru [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
lost
SC Lets hope RIT makes that an option, we don't have to hack our
SC way in the system like that. I hate the registry.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday, May 02, 2001 at 12:32 (my local time), Marck D. Pearlstone
presented these thoughts about DEAD HORSE (was Re: Warning! First worm that hits TB!
too...):
MDP There is no point to this thread. I declare it a DEAD HORSE.
Thank you Marck
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 2 May 2001 14:36:30 +0200, jsvrp.gw wrote these words of wisdom:
jg Funny, but I have as you can see v1.51 and the .PIF extension is
jg already listed, so it seems Ritlabs already solved this problem in the
jg last version. So there
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 21:55:00 -0400, Ben contributed this to our collective
wisdom:
ACM Actually you can, but it involves registry editing, which in this
ACM instance isn't that bad.
ACM Point your registry editor to
ACM HKCU/Software/rit/The Bat!
Hi, Peter,
I understand about invalid vs valid.
However, I don't see where I can see this distinction between good
and bad signature.
I now installed 6.5.8ckt and I get for your message
a pencil with an x, signer: unknown, keyID=0xE10774CE, Key ID:
Invalid Key. Where does it say that this is a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Leo Zelevinsky !
On Tue, 1 May 2001 10:36:52 -0400 GMT your local time,
which was 01.05.2001, 16:36 (GMT+0200) where I live, you wrote:
I now installed 6.5.8ckt and I get for your message
a pencil with an x, signer: unknown,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Silviu!
On Tuesday, May 01, 2001 at 7:26:30 AM you wrote:
You'd say, Look at NT, well I refuse to, it's a huge gorilla, and
sucks to much system resources (in comparison to Linux which needs
about the same resources that Win 95/98 series
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday, May 01, 2001 at 16:36 (my local time), Leo Zelevinsky
presented these thoughts about Warning! First worm that hits TB! too...:
LZ I now installed 6.5.8ckt and I get for your message
LZ a pencil with an x, signer: unknown,
Tuesday, May 01, 2001, 6:24:10 PM, Dierk Haasis wrote:
You'd say, Look at NT, well I refuse to, it's a huge gorilla, and
sucks to much system resources (in comparison to Linux which needs
about the same resources that Win 95/98 series needs).
Another point against Win2K is their driver
Hello!
Wednesday, May 02, 2001, 5:12:59 AM, Ben Mills [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BM But the problem is Ritlabs lack of response to known security issues.
BM Hackers will have a heyday with TB if Ritlabs continues to bury its
BM head in the sand instead of promptly addressing these issues.
What
Hello!
Tuesday, May 01, 2001, 9:28:16 AM, Silviu Cojocaru [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
lost
SC Lets hope RIT makes that an option, we don't have to hack our
SC way in the system like that. I hate the registry.
...Politics? I'm not into
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Allie, This is a reply to your message dated
Monday, April 30, 2001, 6:09:31 PM, when you wrote:
Ai Is it possible to set TB not to execute attachment at all? I
Ai mean not to ask even...
ACM Actually you can, but it involves registry
Hi, all,
On Saturday, April 28, 2001 you wrote:
BC Marck's signature is actually only three lines, but, as a moderator,
BC he PGP signs his messages to the list (the same can be said for
BC Allie). There have been quite a few impersonators on this list in the
BC past.
Is it possible that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Leo,
On 30 April 2001 at 11:14:33 -0400 (which was 16:14 where I live)
Leo Zelevinsky wrote to Brian Clark on TBUDL and made these points:
LZ I have tried and failed to set up TB to check PGP signatures - they
LZ always are displayed as
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Leo!
On Monday, April 30, 2001 at 5:14:33 PM you wrote:
Is this possible to do with the internal PGP implementation,
If he uses DH/DSS I don't think so.
or must I download / install another package?
If you are really interested in PGP
Hello Marck,
On Monday, April 30, 2001 at 5:49:12 PM you wrote:
MDP In the PGP-Log window which TB displays after signature verification,
MDP the left-most icon is a pencil. If there is a red X next to the
MDP pencil then the *signature* is invalid meaning that
MDP 1) The signature is faked.
Hi Dierk,
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, at 17:56:07 +0200 you wrote:
DH As you yourself implicitly stated, you need his key and they
DH must be signed by you. And you have to set up the trust level
DH to full.
That's not completely true. You only need to adjust the trust
settings of Marck's keys (or of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Lars!
On Monday, April 30, 2001 at 6:40:40 PM you wrote:
That's not completely true. You only need to adjust the trust
settings of Marck's keys (or of anyone else) if you want to
automatically trust keys which were signed by Marck.
You
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, April 30, 2001 at 17:14 (my local time), Leo Zelevinsky wrote
about Warning! First worm that hits TB! too...:
LZ I have tried and failed to set up TB to check PGP signatures - they
LZ always are displayed as invalid.
Hi Leo,
you seem to
Tuesday, May 01, 2001, 4:09:31 AM, A Curtis Martin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:50:06 -0400, Ben graced us with these comments:
Ai Is it possible to set TB not to execute attachment at all? I mean not
Ai to ask even...
BM I don't believe so. «..rest snipped..»
Actually you can, but
Tuesday, May 01, 2001, 2:50:06 AM, Ben Mills wrote:
What concerns me more is Ritlabs apparent disregard for its customers
regarding this latest security issue. If it (Ritlabs) has any ambition
to becoming a major player in the mail client business; the way
they've handled this exploit has
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Ben!
On Sunday, April 29, 2001 at 5:13:36 AM you wrote:
/snipped entire cigar/
Get off your high horse! Many of us don't make a profession of reading
all the posts that come through these lists, and I happen to be one of
them!
Maybe not
Hello all,
on Sun, 29 Apr 2001, at 03:22:11 local time (GMT +0100), Marck wrote:
3) This TB hole was plugged in 1.52/beta/10 (IIRC).
any news when those of us not into betas are going to be safe from this
worm ??
--
Rob
using The Bat! 1.51
... Go the extra mile. It makes your boss look
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Rob!
On Sunday, April 29, 2001 at 12:22:20 PM you wrote:
any news when those of us not into betas are going to be safe from this
worm ??
You are ... if you just adhere to e-mail basics. TB! does not execute
any attachment automatically.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sunday, April 29, 2001, 7:13:02 AM, Dierk Haasis wrote:
DH You are ... if you just adhere to e-mail basics. TB! does not execute
DH any attachment automatically.
DH So just don't double-click/execute/open dubious attachments.
DH And - since this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 06:17:15 -0700, George contributed this to our
collective wisdom:
MDP 1) This was all you needed to post to the list.
MDP 2) It was posted last week - did you check the archive?
MDP 3) This TB hole was plugged in 1.52/beta/10
on Sun, 29 Apr 2001, at 13:13:02 local time (GMT +0200), Dierk wrote:
And - since this weekend ranting seems to be on vogue on-list -
?!?!?
hope you have a nice weekend too :-\
--
Rob
using The Bat! 1.51
... After all is said and done, more is said than done.
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Ronald!
On Sunday, April 29, 2001 at 2:57:19 PM you wrote:
I'm sure that we are all extremely impressed by this witty and
knowledgeable response. Your expertise is duly noted here.
I personally didn't view Rob's post as a *rant*, but
Hello Ben,
On Sunday, April 29, 2001 at 5:13:36 AM you wrote:
BM Also, the link is broken so I'm grateful to the
BM poster for forwarding the entire article
TB! included a closing bracket to much into the link ... so double click the
link and remove the last bracket in the address bar or use
on Sun, 29 Apr 2001, at 16:49:34 local time (GMT +0200), Dierk wrote:
2. If I remember correctly Rob did not just ask for a solution but
shot against a perfectly correct answer from Marck insultingly.
oh ?
in that case i would like to know what is so 'insulting' about this ...
R any news
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Dierk,
On 29 April 2001 at 16:49:34 +0200 (which was 15:49 where I live)
Dierk Haasis wrote to Ronald Clark and made these points:
DH 2. If I remember correctly Rob did not just ask for a solution but
DH shot against a perfectly correct answer
Sunday, April 29, 2001, 1:22:20 PM, Rob wrote:
Hello all,
on Sun, 29 Apr 2001, at 03:22:11 local time (GMT +0100), Marck wrote:
3) This TB hole was plugged in 1.52/beta/10 (IIRC).
any news when those of us not into betas are going to be safe from this
worm ??
It seems you, and all the
Sunday, April 29, 2001, 4:25:38 PM, A Curtis Martin wrote:
MDP 1) This was all you needed to post to the list.
MDP 2) It was posted last week - did you check the archive?
MDP 3) This TB hole was plugged in 1.52/beta/10 (IIRC).
MDP /moderator
GFS So! Are we all supposed to be running Beta
Hello all,
on Sun, 29 Apr 2001, at 18:04:58 local time (GMT +0300), Silviu wrote:
It seems you, and all the others _are_ safe from the worm as
long as we do not open the attachment.
of course. but accidents do happen ...
1 click too much or too fast and it's over :-(
so if there really is
On Sunday, April 29, 2001, Silviu Cojocaru wrote:
That still isn't very much OK. They should be able to release
patches on such security threats, and not hurry the release of
the next version, _if_they rush it. I don't think they do, and
they shouldn't, because we want a prime quality
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi ANT-ilic,
On 28 April 2001 at 20:53:17 +0200 (which was 19:53 where I live)
ANT-ilic wrote to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and made these points:
Ai Beware of the Internet-worm Stator
moderator
snip
Ai For more technical details, visit the Kaspersky
Subject: Warning! First worm that hits TB! too...
From: Ben Mills
Dated: Sat, 28 Apr 2001, 23:13:36 (10:13:36 PM Local)
~~
Hi Ben,
BM Also, the link is broken
Worked fine for me.
--
- ND
--
Hi Ben,
@ 11:13:36 PM on 4/28/01, Ben Mills wrote:
...
BM Get off your high horse! Many of us don't make a profession of
BM reading all the posts that come through these lists, and I happen
BM to be one of them!
Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
48 matches
Mail list logo
