On Nov 15, 2004, at 11:54 AM, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:48:35 +0100 in [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Julian Mehnle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But there definitely is a distinction between technical attacks and social engineering attacks, even though they're somewhat overlapping.
I can't see logically how things that are distinct can also be overlapping. Is that really the description you want to use?
You get a mail...
If it has an attachment that will run in the background on your computer for the express reason of propagating itself, it's for clam.
If it has an attachment that will spread to other computers to cause harm, it's for clam.
If it was sent to you by a worm with itself as a payload, it's for clam.
If viewing the message takes advantage of an OS bug to alter the computer without your knowledge, it's for clam.
If it's a bunch of flashy graphics telling you to visit a website for fantastic deals on hiding money from third world countries while getting fantastic mortgage rates on your pen1s enlargement ointment, it's for a spam filter.
If it only does harm if you follow a link and then consciously give your account information, be it ebay or bank or paypal, to a third party site, it's for the spam filter.
howzat? :-)
-Bart
_______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
