"Just zis Guy, you know?" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 00:26:48 -0000, "Robert Peffers" <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >I did install a couple of other mail clients a few weeks ago but they were little better than
> >> >O.E. so why bother?
>
> >> So you don't get a virus and pass it on to all your friends. Obviously.
>
> >Run a firewall and virus checker.
>
> And hope to keep one jump ahead.
You don't need ot keep one jump ahead as most virus checkers have an auto update as do firewalls
and, of course Microsoft.
> Or get a mail client which is immune to most of the exploits by design, and don't worry so much.
There really is no such animal.
> Of course, the fact that in order to use "free" Outhouse safely one must invest in a virus
> checker is a bit of a downer, but most people shuld be using one anyway.
Everyone should be using one.
> Strange, though, how the script-kiddies still manage to bring the 'net toa grinding halt every
> now and then despite all those firewall and virus scanner users.
That has not much to do with MS. The grinding halts are due to DOS attacks on servers. O.K. so they
might hi-jack machines but if these were running firewall etc., they could hardly be hijacked.
Sometimes those using other than OE have become over confident and come a cropper anyway.
> One good way to prevent that would be for Microsoft to fix the security holes. They've had about
> six years so far, maybe it's a bit tricky.
As I have been trying to point out it would not matter for the finding of holes in any programme is
a matter of how many people are looking for holes. If MS did have better programmes it would just
present those who were looking for holes a better incentive and a bigger chalange. Looks very like
that challange is a big part of the attraction for them. If they could not find any holes they would
just look for them in someone else's programmes. Put it this way - normal people have more to do
with their time - so those who want to muck up other people's machines are a very peculuar breed. A
bit on the same level as any other vandal.
>
> >> And OE reads HTML content by default;
>
> >Turn it of in the options and while there turn of attachments. Who needs them on a text based
> >medium?
>
> First, most people don't know to do that and don't know the risks; second, the default is
> insecure; third, email is not universally a text-based medium any more. I get mail in Poco, see
> it's from a trusted source, click to load the images and see rich content. Poco is nothing
> special, it's just one of a huge number of mail clients which don't have built-in security holes.
I hope you are very sure about that. Anyway OE does show there is HTML content or attachmensts and
you can then accept them if you wish.
>
> >Check your mail and delete the spam direct from the server. Then you only download the messages
> >you want. Get a programme like Mailwasher, (free or rather donationware), but there are better
> >alternatives.
>
> One of which is a mail client which is not open to all the Outhouse exploits, none of which have
> been fixed despite several upgrade releases.
One of what? I am talking about checking your mail by previewing it on the server and deleting all
the spam etc., from the server so you only download the mail with OE that you want.
>
> Me, I use several platforms interchangeably. Outhouse i the thing most likely to generate
> incompatible content, so I don't use it unless I have nothing else to hand.
I think I did mention I also have two or three other mail/news clients on my machines. I have little
interest in pictures and sound in mail or news messages anyway so there are few problems.
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots for Sincerely),, Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers, Kelty, Fife. KY4 0HG. Scotland,
(UK).
[email protected] (Remove specs to make reply).
*The Eck's Files*, Web Site is
http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk/
---
Aa ootgannin mail free frae wee beasties.. Checked by AVG anti-virus system
(
http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.456 / Virus Database: 256 - Release Date: 18/02/03
It was reasonably popular, but certainly didn't
