>> Having said that, a situation could arise where I receive an >> infected e-mail which NOD32's IMON module does not yet recognize >> (as happened to me last week with the Fuclip.A worm). That >> infected e-mail would sit undiscovered in my inbox despite several >> NOD32 on-demand scans.
ASK> <drool> ASK> Horror, panic, tragedy! ASK> </drool> ASK> What harm would an unrecognized piece of malicious code do to you, as ASK> long as it sits in an email message where it can't be executed? You have ASK> to manually safe/open the attachment with the malicious code (and if you ASK> do that, it is proof that virus scanners are required mostly to protect ASK> people from themselves). ASK> Even when you're using one of the not-so-secure email programs - the ASK> last vulnerability in Outlook/OE that allowed code execution upon ASK> previewing a message was... hmmm... years ago, I'd say. ASK> In other words, these statements of antivirus program vendors are mostly ASK> there to sell their product and spread FUD. The virus doesn't harm me, obviously, when it sits dormant in my inbox. However, you clipped the key sentence from the end of my paragraph: "Since NOD32's IMON module does not scan outgoing mail, I could unwittingly forward it to, and infect, an unsuspecting recipient." At best, it would be embarrassing to forward infected mail to a client. At worst it would be unprofessional, negligent and harmful. I don't think it's too much to expect an anti-virus application to be able to locate viruses in e-mail files with its on-demand scan, and to scan outgoing mail. -- Code 2 :canadaflag: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The Bat! version 2.12.00 on Windows XP Service Pack 2 Japanese hotel room: Please to bathe inside the tub. ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.95.08 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
