Hello Allie, On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 21:38:28 -0500 GMT (28/10/02, 09:38 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote:
PMFJI. S>> I think the point is one of familiarity. Not every user is S>> going to be as familiar with .vbs extensions, for example, as S>> they are .com or .exe types. Generally speaking, even the most S>> basic of user gets to grips with the dangers of running .com S>> and .exe files, as they are commonplace extensions on a Windows S>> system, and so understand them as being executable files, > Are you sure about this? :) There are those and those. Those that do understand which file extensions are dangerous but have set their Windows Explorer to not show known extensions. So they won't ever see files with .scr extension or such. And then there are those who don't know what an extension is. > - From my experience with trying to give advice to novices, I still > think so. I have a difficult time speaking about file-types. I get a > high incidence of blank faces reluctant to make the effort to > understand what I'm saying. I have made the same experience. > and there's usually understanding when I advise them to treat all > attachments with extreme care, to delete them without prejudice once > there's any suspicion about them This is usually the moment when they smile at me pityfully. what if the forward is indeed a picture of Anna Kournikova? Should they delete it, just because it *may* contain a virus? No way, Jose. S>> Again, in and ideal world that would be fine. But it aint, and S>> users don't and won't do as they should always, and I don't S>> think they deserve to get infected because of it. Some people S>> might call those types lamers or whatever - a term I hate - S>> but it's not their fault that there is a war against Microsoft S>> going on and they happened to get caught up in the middle of it. > I understand and agree with your sentiments. Well, I don't. Microsoft isn't the victim of a war. It would be easy for them to not allow IFrame and such, or at least ask user's confirmation before such is started. MS are fully aware of the security risk which they label useer friendliness, and which has cost economies millions of dollars, but they chose not to do anything about it. The reason most viruses are written for OL/OE is not only that those mailers are the most widely used. But also because it is so easy to write viruses for them. And this is why MS is a contributor to the virus-community: they keep it easy for them, not intention to ever put in safeguards. Even where safeguards are in the software and can be turned on, the default is to have them turned off. No, MS is not a victim, they make mailicious virus spread easy, because they choose to. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62/Beta7 under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build 2222 A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
