On Sat, 06 May 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] generated:
>> Linux _is_ susceptible to the virus in a different way... if your
>> mailserver is a linux machine, and you don't take measures to prevent
>> the offending mail go through it, and the rare possibility that it clogs
>> with many word macro virus emails...
>
>To be pedantic, yes. However that is like saying that the routers and other
>infrastructure are susceptible to the virus because they could suffer
>collateral damage due to traffic caused by the love bug. We know very well that
>the unsafe practices encouraged by Outlook are at fault here. Sometimes it's
>not a good idea to blur the line between data and code.
I don't think it's that pedantic. Certainly Outlook is to blame, but if
your mailserver crashes due to being flooded with virus email, you can't
stand there over the charred soggy remains and say "Oh, my linux box wasn't
susceptible to this virus. Hooray!" You wouldn't even need a large
userbase, if they're mostly using Outlook and mostly not aware of the virus
itself. In fact that sounds a lot like the place I work at.
--
jamesw
<Hoju> Keyboard solo! skskskskskskskskskskskskskskskskskskskskksksksksks
------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux Users Group Mailing List - http://www.slug.org.au
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe in the text
