sing AVG virus checker for my E-mail and
cannot find a way to do this. Help or advice on another Virus
checker would be gratefully received.
Please see:
http://www.grisoft.com/html/us_avgbat.htm?session=1c9fdc91bb5dad619cff8db73aad75e6
--
Best regards,
Roland mailto: [EMAIL P
Hello Ben!
On Sunday, September 8, 2002 at 2:29:52 PM you wrote:
...I think perfect is a bit too far! Where is TBs newgroup support?
No. TB! is an e-mail client, *not* a newsreader.
What about the Expand/Collapse All Threads command?
Expansion is supported; only collapsing is a
apse All Threads command?
BK And what about the transparent mail ticker support?
BK ;)
Okay, okay! I was only referring to the virus protection side of
things g.
- --
Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator
TB! v1.62/Beta5 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2
'
-BEGIN PGP S
Sh'mae Ben,
On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, at 13:29:52 [GMT +0100] (or 13:29 in Wales)
regarding 'AVG virus checker and TB' you wrote:
BK ...I think perfect is a bit too far! Where is TBs newgroup support?
BK What about the Expand/Collapse All Threads command? And what about
BK the transparent mail
Hi Ben,
on Sun, 8 Sep 2002 13:29:52 +0100GMT (08.09.02, 14:29 +0200GMT here),
you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :
MDP Once you have the plug-in, configure TB to use it under Options |
MDP Virus protection and all will be better than perfect.
BK ...I think perfect
Hi Marck,
On Sun, 8 Sep 2002 12:20:03 +0100 GMT (Sep 08, 17:05 my local time),
you [MDP] wrote:
MDP Once you have the plug-in, configure TB to use it under Options |
MDP Virus protection and all will be better than perfect.
Marck, the AV test results of hackfix.org (with random trojans) seem
Hello Adam,
Sunday, September 8, 2002, 12:24:01 PM, you wrote:
Thanks for the info, much appreciated.
--
Best regards,
Jimmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information:
Hello Adam,
Thanks for the info, much appreciated.
--
Best regards,
Jimmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Hello Luc,
Sunday, September 8, 2002, 12:52:47 PM, you wrote:
Thanks for the info, much appreciated.
--
Best regards,
Jimmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information:
Hello Ben,
Sunday, September 8, 2002, 1:25:32 PM, you wrote:
Thanks for the info, much appreciated.
--
Best regards,
Jimmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information:
.
AFAIR similar tests in German computer magazines the number for AVG
seems right, although Kaspersky and NAV usually don't score that high
- virtually no virus scanner does. that's why F-Secure uses two
(three) *different* scan engines.
BTW, Norton gets always highest marks for its interface
Hello Jim!
On Sunday, September 8, 2002 at 7:44:18 PM you wrote:
Thanks for the info, much appreciated.
Jim, it's nice to see someone thanking others as you do, but for one
it is not necessary - I think we all agree that thanks is - most of
the time - implicit. And even if you want to thank
Hello Adam Rykala,
On Sunday, September 08 2002 at 08:45 AM PDT, you wrote:
And if you mean turning TB! into OE then ugghhh.
No, the only one mentioning OE was you. ;o) What he was inquiring about
is the NewsReader Plugin... no more... no less. ;o)
--
Nick Andriash
Creston, B.C. Canada
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jim Lanyon [JL] wrote:'
JL Thanks for the info, much appreciated.
moderator
There's no need to publicly thank others for help like this. A
single reply thanking everyone would have been much better.
Hi Dierk,
On Sun, 8 Sep 2002 20:49:44 +0200 GMT (Sep 09, 00:34 my local time),
you [DH] wrote:
DH AFAIR similar tests in German computer magazines the number for
DH AVG seems right,
...snip
What scared me about the hackfix.org tests is that few trojans in
their petri dish seemed familiar.
Hello Sudip,
SP Things are not that self-explanatory. You still have to change your
SP TB! settings to route the incoming mails through NAV's POPROXY module.
SP See my message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I never once had to do that. I only turned on email scanning in NAV
Hi Kurgan,
On Sat, 27 Jul 2002 22:45:44 -0500 GMT (Jul 28, 09:30 my local time),
you [KLc] wrote
KLc I never once had to do that. I only turned on email scanning in
KLc NAV and it worked. Never had to do anything to TB. (I'm referring
KLc to NAV 2001 and prior.)
I find that incredulous !
is on) drives me crazy (I get/send
KLc a lot of email).
One suspects that it does it so the recipient can see the
'scanned virus free by Norton' note that it puts in the
email, but that's pointless too, since you have to open
the mail to read it.
Symantec has been spending too much time with MS
Hello Sudip,
SP I find that incredulous ! AFAIK, NAV 2001 configures OE and Eudora
SP automatically but not others, certainly not TB!. Are you sure, your
SP mails were(are) being routed through POPROXY? It's NAV 2002 that scans
SP the default POP and SMTP ports, thereby eliminating the need to
On Sunday, July 28, 2002, 4:47:00 PM, Lynn Turriff wrote:
One suspects that it does it so the recipient can see the
'scanned virus free by Norton' note that it puts in the
email, but that's pointless too, since you have to open
the mail to read it.
I have never seen this notice - are you
Sunday, July 28, 2002, 6:40:11 PM, you wrote:
KLc Hello Sudip,
SP I find that incredulous ! AFAIK, NAV 2001 configures OE and Eudora
SP automatically but not others, certainly not TB!. Are you sure, your
SP mails were(are) being routed through POPROXY? It's NAV 2002 that scans
SP the default
Sunday, July 28, 2002, 1:19:24 PM, you wrote:
JBL On Sunday, July 28, 2002, 4:47:00 PM, Lynn Turriff wrote:
One suspects that it does it so the recipient can see the
'scanned virus free by Norton' note that it puts in the
email, but that's pointless too, since you have to open
the mail
Sunday, July 28, 2002, 2:25:12 PM, you wrote:
JR Sudip is right though - both 2000 and 2001 need manual
JR configuration
JR of The Bat to scan mail. I cannot see how email scanning
JR will occur if
JR this is not done.
KLcAs I said, I *did* tell Nav that I was using an other email
KLc
Hello TBUDL,
How do I make NAV 2001 works with TheBat ???
Thanks
--
Best regards,
mauricio mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current Ver: 1.61
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Unsubscribe:
Against Timeouts When Scanning
| Email.
|
| Step 2 Configure NAV 2001 to take appropriate action
|
| The Ask me what to do setting causes NAV to stop processing and to
| wait for your instructions whenever it detects a virus in incoming
| email. This prevents unattended download of all subsequent
Hello Sudip,
Saturday, July 27, 2002, 11:40:48 PM, you wrote:
SP | You need to configure both Norton Antivirus and The Bat! before NAV
SP | can scan your incoming email.
Thanks for your fast answer and for the solution; I made all the
changes and it worked very fine.
--
Best
Hello Mauricio,
mdn How do I make NAV 2001 works with TheBat ???
Open Nav and go to Options and look for Email. It's all right
there in order, and self-explanatory. :) You don't have to specify
The Bat!, just turn on email scanning. If I remember correctly, you
simply tell it
Hi Kurgan,
On Sat, 27 Jul 2002 21:54:02 -0500 GMT (Jul 28, 08:39 my local time),
you [KLc] wrote
KLc Open Nav and go to Options and look for Email. It's all right
KLc there in order, and self-explanatory.
Things are not that self-explanatory. You still have to change your
TB! settings to route
Hello Thomas F,
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 11:47:16 +0700 GMT your local time,
which was Saturday, June 29, 2002, 11:47:16 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Thomas F wrote:
Hello tracer,
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 06:26:49 +0700 GMT (29/06/02, 06:26 +0700 GMT),
tracer wrote:
t Mail comes from their
Hello tbudl,
Following the discussion earlier this week about whether .jpg files
could carry a viral payload, the following article has appeared!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/25718.html
:-0
Julian
--
Best regards,
Julian mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using
Hi Julian,
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002 11:02:39 +0100, you wrote:
Hello tbudl,
Following the discussion earlier this week about whether .jpg files
could carry a viral payload, the following article has appeared!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/25718.html
Interesting... now I'm going to
Hi,
I'm currently using the Free Version of AVG by Grisoft with the Plug-In to
The Bat! This works well and recently caught Klez and quarantined it. But
after reading the comments about NOD32 and looking at their site and seeing
the comparative speed and scores, I'm thinking of changed to NOD32.
Hi Mitja,
BTW: I solved most if not all of the virus problem by filtering mail
and looking for:
_*name=*.vbs
_*name=*.scr
_*name=*.pif
_*name=*.bat
*Content-type: audio/x-wav; name=*.exe*
*Content-type: audio/x-midi; name=*.exe*
That's interesting! I entered these strings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Daniel Van Rooijen [Copycats] [DVR] wrote:
DVR BTW: I solved most if not all of the virus problem by filtering
DVR mail and looking for:
DVR _*name=*.vbs
DVR _*name=*.scr
DVR _*na
Hello Daniel,
That's interesting! I entered these strings but it didn't work. I went
to the Sorting Office/Filters and I defined a new filter. I entered
the first string (the one for vbs files) under Filter Strings and the
other 5 strings as separate rule sets under the Alternatives tab. For
ACM However, TB! will search only the headers and text body for
ACM matching strings.
Yes, but Allie, those infected attachments are referenced in the header by the
strings that Mitja defined. It's for those references that Mitja was
setting up a filter.
Looking at the source of some infected
Hi Allie,
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002 05:41:10 -0500, you wrote:
I would assume that they haven't included a source search option since
attachments consist of a lot of raw text data that would lead to a lot
of overhead if they were included in a string search.
You'd also get a lot of false
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jonathan Angliss [JA] wrote:
JA You'd also get a lot of false positives... but I think if you were
JA to search the whole message, you'd probably match on it because
JA attachements are part of
ason why), it
searches the headers and the message body.
Take my eicar test message:
The content header says:
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=--D3A45B2109AEC0
No reference to the virus name there.
Now, on examination of the source, if I look *after* the message body
where TB! doesn't searc
Hi Allie,
ACM on examination of the source, if I look *after* the message body
ACM where TB! doesn't search,
Now I see! I'm still used to a different representation of internet
headers (from using Compuserve for years, where they are translated and put
below the message body, along with any
On Wednesday, June 12, 2002, Allie C Martin wrote...
Yes, it stops there. Attachments aren't part of the text body.
Shouldn't the anywhere option get it then? Or does anywhere mean
only headers and body?
--
Jonathan Angliss
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jonathan Angliss [JA] wrote:
Yes, it stops there. Attachments aren't part of the text body.
JA Shouldn't the anywhere option get it then? Or does anywhere mean
JA only headers and body?
It
On Wednesday, June 12, 2002, Allie C Martin wrote...
JA Shouldn't the anywhere option get it then? Or does anywhere mean
JA only headers and body?
It means only headers and message body text.
hehe... defeats the meaning of anywhere then ;)
--
Jonathan Angliss
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jonathan Angliss [JA] wrote:
It means only headers and message body text.
JA hehe... defeats the meaning of anywhere then ;)
Depends on your point of reference but I think this discussion
On Wednesday, June 12, 2002, Allie C Martin wrote...
JA hehe... defeats the meaning of anywhere then ;)
Depends on your point of reference but I think this discussion
occurred before. There's a list of places where you can exclusively
search for strings and then 'Anywhere' encompasses all of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jonathan Angliss [JA] wrote:
JA As you said... depends on your point of view. I'd have expected
JA anywhere to include anywhere in the email... and seeing as an
JA attachment is also in the email
messages.
That is also true... most of my filtering based on content (ie
virus/spam) is done on the server, and even with a 24meg file I got
sent yesterday, it took all of about 30 seconds I think to read
through, but that is procmail running on a linux mail server...
probably a lot slower
Hi,
I'm currently using the Free Version of AVG by Grisoft with the Plug-In to
The Bat! This works well and recently caught Klez and quarantined it. But
after reading the comments about NOD32 and looking at their site and
seeing the comparative speed and scores, I'm thinking of changed to
Allie William-
Thanks. I've now got NOD32 installed and happily running on my Win2k
server. I expect to give it a dry run this weekend (unless I receive
any more email viruses before that time).
-Mark
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! v1.60h on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 2
V. good it is too!
Where's the quarantine folder put? In the installation directory?
No - in the account folder tree (and the equivalent messages.tbb in
the home directory $QRNTN$ sub-folder). I meant TB folder, not OS
folder. The virus is kept internal to the TB system.
- --
Cheers -- .
S folder. The virus is kept internal to the TB system.
I assume that this method is common to all the plug-ins?
Can these plug-ins strip messages of the offending attachments (remove
the infected part option?)?
There's very little documentation of what they do and how they do it.
If the plugin will strip
meant TB folder, not
MDP OS folder. The virus is kept internal to the TB system.
I assume that this method is common to all the plug-ins?
I think it is.
Can these plug-ins strip messages of the offending attachments
(remove the infected part option?)?
I don't think so. Then again, I can't un
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Haico [H] wrote:
...
H You can mail the eicar test virus to yourself if you want to test
H if the plugin works.
Thanks for that.
I'm using the NOD32 plug-in which works nicely. It can str
ey don't strip the attachments but they move the whole message
MDP into a quarantine folder - clearly marked and there's no chance
MDP of accidental execution.
The NOD32 plugin will strip attachments as well. It leaves another
attachment in place called 'removed by virus checker'.
MDP You can hav
04 June 2002, 11:22, you wrote:
ACM I'm using the NOD32 plug-in which works nicely.
Where did you find the plug-in, Allie or are you talking about the
POP3 scanner that comes as part of NOD?
--
Clive Taylor
Current Ver: 1.60m
FAQ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Clive,
@04 June 2002, 13:43:09 +0100 Clive Taylor wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ACM I'm using the NOD32 plug-in which works nicely.
Where did you find the plug-in, Allie or are you talking about the
POP3 scanner that comes
Hello Haico,
give a try to
http://www.aleph-tec.com/eicar/
regards,
oleg
Tuesday, June 4, 2002, 1:10:35 AM, you wrote:
H On 4-6-2002 at 0:47, Rick Reumann wrote:
H Hai Rick,
Question about this... do you actually have to click on a virus
attachment and attempt
04 June 2002, 13:43, you wrote:
CT Where did you find the plug-in, Allie
Don't bother responding, Allie, I've found the info in another thread
you've answered!
--
Clive Taylor
Current Ver: 1.60m
FAQ:
Marck-
Hmmm...there's no documentation with any of the plugins on the ftp
site. I now know what the Nod32 plugin is. What's the difference in
the others? I take it they work with different AV products?
Tuesday, June 4, 2002, 5:49:25 AM, you wrote:
MDP And these:
MDP
On 4-6-2002 at 17:51, Oleg Titov wrote:
Hai Oleg,
give a try to
http://www.aleph-tec.com/eicar/
That's better. :)
Thanks,
Haico
Current Ver: 1.60m
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL
MDP You just use the Add function in the Virus Protection UI and some
MDP common sense I think.
...I hate that part. All that thinking hurts my brain...
Er...so do I need to download them all and install them to see what
BAV works with what AV product?
-Mark
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Mark Wieder [MW] wrote:
...
MW Er...so do I need to download them all and install them to see what
MW BAV works with what AV product?
SophosNT.BAV Works with Sophos Antivirus for NT
Sophos95.BAV
Allie-
Thanks. I hadn't heard of some of these AV programs before, hence the
confusion. I'll check 'em out. In the interest of saving some time
(aka laziness) would you know if any of these work on servers? That's
one of the drawbacks of AVG (and McAfee and Norton, etc).
-Mark
[EMAIL
Hello Mark
Thank you for your email dated Tuesday, June 4, 2002, 9:54:39 PM, in which you wrote:
MW (aka laziness) would you know if any of these work on servers?
NOD32 does - http://www.nod32.com/products/products.htm
--
Regards
William
Flying with The Bat! 1.60m www.ritlabs.com/the_bat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Mark Wieder [MW] wrote:
...
MW Thanks. I hadn't heard of some of these AV programs before, hence
MW the confusion. I'll check 'em out. In the interest of saving some
MW time (aka laziness) would
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Mark,
@04 June 2002, 11:15:19 -0700 (19:15 UK time) Mark Wieder wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmmm...there's no documentation with any of the plugins on the ftp
site.
You just use the Add function in the Virus Pr
Hi all,
Is there a way I can get TB to work with AVG Anti-Virus?
(www.grisoft.com)
Surely it should be possible to extract attached files to a temp
directory and then run my anti virus program on them (command line)?
TIA,
--
Ben Kennish
[EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Ben,
@03 June 2002, 10:00:28 +0100 Ben Kennish wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a way I can get TB to work with AVG Anti-Virus?
(www.grisoft.com)
Surely it should be possible to extract attached files t
Dear Marck,
That AVG Virus Protection is a cool Plug-In. I added it too.
Are there any other cool plugins that I have missed out on ?
Kind Regards,
Giles
***
This is a reply message
From: Marck D Pearlstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ben
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Marck D Pearlstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Surely it should be possible to extract attached files to a temp
directory and then run my anti virus program on them (command line)?
You don't need to!
Download this:
http://www.thebat.ipex.cz/stazeni/beta
On Monday, June 3, 2002, 5:11:22 AM, Marck wrote:
MDP Download this:
MDP http://www.thebat.ipex.cz/stazeni/beta/avgbatb7.zip and unzip the
MDP contents into your TB executable folder (C:\Program Files\The Bat!).
MDP Then configure the plug-in through the menu Options | Virus
MDP protection
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Rick,
@03 June 2002, 18:47:46 -0400 (23:47 UK time) Rick Reumann wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Question about this... do you actually have to click on a virus
attachment and attempt to open it be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Marck D Pearlstone [MDP] wrote:
...
MDP Nope. With the plug in, TB throws an alert on arrival and puts the
MDP whole message in a TB Quarantine folder. V. good it is too!
Where's the quarantine
On 4-6-2002 at 0:47, Rick Reumann wrote:
Hai Rick,
Question about this... do you actually have to click on a virus
attachment and attempt to open it before AVG will catch that it
is a virus? I know a while back I was sent a virus but AVG didn't
say anything. Of course
Thursday, May 02, 2002, 8:02:36 PM, Melissa wrote:
Using The Bat! v1.53bis on Windows 98
MR Why are you still using such an old build?
I sent this reply on 3 May, but it doesn't seem to have got through:
-
The easy answer is that it's the last one about which I got an
official
Hello Melissa!
On Monday, May 6, 2002 at 4:29:52 AM you wrote:
3DES for the encryption, and SHA1 (SHA160) for the Hash algorithm.
Still though, if you have the choice to use either S/MIME or PGP, I
would recommend using PGP - for several reasons.
That's funny, I concur with your choice for
At Thursday, May 2, 2002, 9:39:45 PM, Michael wrote:
Wednesday, May 1, 2002, 10:12:33 PM, Marck scribbled:
MDP Sounds like you've got something weird in your startup procedure or
MDP some kind of fail-safe restoring the registry behind your back.
MDP Whatever. It's nothing to do with The Bat!
At Thursday, May 2, 2002, 5:55:20 PM, Alexis wrote:
Bonjour Michael,
Mercredi, le 01 mai 2002 à 23h44 [GMT -0700] (ce qui correspond à
08h44 ici où j'habite), Michael L. Wilson =[MLW] a écrit à [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
MLW Microsoft Product for email, so to keep the discussion going, I have no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 4 May 2002, at 08:53:00 -0500 Michael wrote:
MD I can confirm this. I've tried reading a message originated from
MD Outlook and TheBat! 1.60c. The implementations are mutually
MD incompatible. So much so, that Outlook will not even recognize
Hello Mandara,
Sunday, May 5, 2002, 1:30:56 PM, you digitally penned the following;
M Hash: SHA1
M On Sat, 4 May 2002, at 08:53:00 -0500 Michael wrote:
MD I can confirm this. I've tried reading a message originated from
MD Outlook and TheBat! 1.60c. The implementations are mutually
MD
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday, May 05, 2002, at 6:31:23 PM PST, Lynna Lunsford wrote:
Forgive me if this has been covered previously but If I choose to
use the Internal SMIME signing feature
There are a few additional configuration options available. Which
Bonjour Michael,
Mercredi, le 01 mai 2002 à 23h44 [GMT -0700] (ce qui correspond à
08h44 ici où j'habite), Michael L. Wilson =[MLW] a écrit à [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
MLW Microsoft Product for email, so to keep the discussion going, I have no
MLW choice but Eudora.
no you could try pocomail
Friday, May 3, 2002, 7:08:22 AM, Mandara scribbled:
MR I still don't know why the two implementations should be
MR incompatible, but they are. I can S/MIME sign using either one,
MD They weren't. This is a bug that has been reported.
M Hm, no, it refers to normal S/MIME implementation/standard
On Sat, 4 May 2002, Michael Disabato wrote:
snip
I can confirm this. I've tried reading a message originated from
Outlook and TheBat! 1.60c. The implementations are mutually
incompatible. So much so, that Outlook will not even recognize that
the message from TB! was even signed. The
Dear Michael,
--- Michael L. Wilson / Thursday, 02.05.2002, 23:46:48
TB! can not be a Virus
I cannot comment on what you can find. From time to time over the
years, I just don;t post things because things are going well. I
have sent no less than 19 messages about
Thursday, May 2, 2002, 5:01:08 PM, Mandara scribbled:
M Btw, the term Microsoft anything-dealing-with-privacy-security
M sounds pretty weird, nein? Do you folks really think it is a good idea
M making Bat involved with a such things?
That was the point of one of my earlier messages. The answer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 3 May 2002, at 05:51:47 -0500 Michael wrote, or scribbled:
M Btw, the term Microsoft anything-dealing-with-privacy-security
M sounds pretty weird, nein? Do you folks really think it is a good idea
M making Bat involved with a such things?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, 11:28 PM, you wrote:
I had this happen to me more than once and never figured out QHY. SO
how do you get rid of the history
/ Paul
JA Technically I didn't... I Just stopped TB! from using the
history/recent
On Friday, May 03, 2002, Paul Cartwright wrote...
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, 11:28 PM, you wrote:
I had this happen to me more than once and never figured out QHY. SO
how do you get rid of the history
/ Paul
JA Technically I didn't... I Just stopped TB! from using the
Hello Michael L. Wilson,
Ok, if your folders are missing presumably you know some of their
names...
Why not just do a simple search for a few of them to see where they
are and whats in them...
Once you know where they are and they arent all zapped, getting the
bat to realise its looking in the
Thursday, May 02, 2002, 8:02:36 PM, Melissa wrote:
Using The Bat! v1.53bis on Windows 98
MR Why are you still using such an old build?
The easy answer is that it's the last one about which I got an
official notification with a link to a download site.
More seriously, I've been so confused
,
deleting the bat, never to return. The bat is a virus.
Michael, this could be any number of things...you should stick with it and
ask some questions of the list...you'd certainly get some help. I bet it
has more to do with settings on your computer/OS than it does with TB!.
--
Regards
Whatever. It's nothing to do with The Bat! The Bat! is the victim, not
the culprit.
Therefore, I am, deleting the bat, never to return.
As you wish. Eudora is a bit of a silly choice, but each to their own
I guess.
The bat is a virus.
LOL! Now you're being ridiculous! Hey - perhaps SpamKi
.
1.53d.
(Btw, I almost deleted entire thread since I wasn't interested about
Anti-Virus topic.)
Mandara
- --
(__) If you need this key:
('') mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=0x257DFF36
\/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
iD8DBQE80FBrvgcu6yV9/zYRAtmxAJ9xOw9XF+bkGoa1BBxF9P3x1uy/wQCgrWVs
, and the same thing occurs. Therefore, I am,
MLW deleting the bat, never to return. The bat is a virus.
Did you recently do any virus scans?
Do you run any software to clean the registry or to install/uninstall
programs automatically?
--
Groetjes, Roelof
Dear Michael,
--- Michael L. Wilson / Thursday, 02.05.2002, 08:42:05
The bat is a virus. goodbye
I have been a TB user for years.
But I can only find postings from you starting Dec. 15. 2001 21:48 on
TB!udl [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I love it. I us
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael L. Wilson [MLW] wrote:
...
MLW Messages have been posted about this and no help. The fact that I
MLW have to rebuild me entire message base just to read the posts
MLW makes it difficult to interact. Any help? Give it. I'll listen
MLW and try
On Wednesday, May 1, 2002, 9:12 PM, you wrote:
the answer is that I had to go back to Thawte and get a NEW cert (
for my new winXp IE 6.0 setup. I guess the old certs stay with the
old IE. I had 5 or 6, one for each email. I'll get 2 more certs for
my normal email addresses that I use,
Wednesday, May 1, 2002, 10:12:33 PM, Marck scribbled:
MDP Sounds like you've got something weird in your startup procedure or
MDP some kind of fail-safe restoring the registry behind your back.
MDP Whatever. It's nothing to do with The Bat! The Bat! is the victim, not
MDP the culprit.
When I
Wednesday, May 1, 2002, 11:20:29 PM, Allie scribbled:
ACM The same principle holds for an S/MIME certificate since it can be
ACM used outside the scope of e-mail as well. I see you aren't interested
ACM or have use for your S/MIME certificate outside e-mail. This is the
ACM potential advantage
501 - 600 of 1080 matches
Mail list logo
