Re: [Declude.Virus] blocking eml and msg attachments

[Matt]

Darin, I would suggest maybe trying 1.0.6 instead of the beta.  I have no measurable delay moving from one message to another; it's instantaneous.  Even in the IMail Forum which I have messages going back to 1/1/2004, everything happens instantly.  I am not on a laptop, and my system is only slightly faster as far as the stats go, but I don't think that makes a difference.  Maybe the newer versions do things differently.  I would doubt that the developers would accept a noticeable slowdown in a final version. Matt Darin Cox wrote: According to the Thunderbird web page and download filename, Thunderbird has a 1.5.1 beta 1.  Check the website.  However, when I installed it, it said it was installing 1.4.   Startup speed for Thunderbird is way faster than OE at just a few seconds compared to 20-30 seconds for OE, however I leave email open all day every day, so startup isn't much of an issue for me.   What I am seeing much slower in Thunderbird is moving from one message to another in the preview window.  In OE it's very snappy with ~1/2 second response, but in Thunderbird I'm seeing 1-3 seconds before I can read the message.    Also, double-clicking to open the message is between 0.5 and 1 second in OE, but 3-4 seconds in Thunderbird.   So, for reading mail quickly, it's much slower for me on a 3GHz P4 laptop with 1GB RAM.   I have about 1GB of email in a couple hundred folders. Darin.     ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt To: Declude.Virus@declude.com Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] blocking eml and msg attachments Darin, I'm confused.  FireFox, the Web browser is at 1.5.1 beta, but Thunderbird, the E-mail client, is at 1.0.6. I'm also not clear on what you mean regarding speed.  I am very happy, and it seems to me that an empty OE or Outlook is much slower to launch, and Thunderbird seems faster when there is a ton of E-mail in a folder.  Thunderbird is meant to be a fairly lean application.  It is also very stable, at least on my system.  I have about 7 E-mail accounts going, and I over 2 GB of E-mail dispersed through them. You might be running into issues with indexing folders following an initial setup?  Maybe you could be more specific about the speed issues. Matt Darin Cox wrote: Just loaded it (1.5.1 beta).  Seems to be almost identical to OE for the way I use it...except slower.  Speed is one of the reasons I use OE instead of Outlook. :( Darin.     ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt To: Declude.Virus@declude.com Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:07 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] blocking eml and msg attachments Thunderbird just simply works.  My only complaint is that the spell checker sucks and has serious problems if you are off by more than one letter.  For the type of work that we do, it is definitely a better application.  The E-mail is stored in plain text files so you can search it that way, and there's none of that magic stuff that hides important things from you the way that Outlook does.  And of course hardly any known vulnerabilities for auto-execution. Matt Darin Cox wrote: Plain text would be my preference as well, to see headers and message at once. Hmmm...may have to try Thunderbird again.  It seemed to be missing some features I liked in OE the last time I tried it.  I would use Outlook, but it still experiences too many failures in communicating with the TCP/IP stack, and is too slow and bloated for my taste...and preview doesn't seem to work as well as OE.  If MS would combine the best features of OE and Outlook, they'd have a better mail client.   Darin.     ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt To: Declude.Virus@declude.com Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:46 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] blocking eml and msg attachments Hmm, works fine in Thunderbird/Netscape, or at least I can see it as plain text. It seems from Pete's MIME headers that he intended for the message to just simply be attached and viewable as the original message.  If he changed the extension to .eml that should work.  I'm not sure whether or not is is better to see the plain text source or the rendered message.  I guess I am used to seeing the plain text and it is easier for me to figure out what the rule matched that way without a Ctrl+U to view the source (shortcut in Thunderbird/Netscape). Matt Darin Cox wrote: Yep... banning 1.msg wouldn't be a good idea unless we can get Pete to change the name of his attachments. I myself would prefer them not to be named .msg (.txt would be _great_) as I can't open them directly in OE that way. I have to save them to disk in order to see which false positive I reported. Darin. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Tolmachoff (Lists)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <Declude.Virus@declude.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:27 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] blocking eml and msg attachments My bad. I was not banning eml and msg. I realized that as I was getting AOL feedbacks. What I was banning was 1.msg as there was a virus reported to be using that. Sniffer responds to false positives and in doing so, renames the request to 1.msg as an attachment to the response. John T eServices For You -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 11:01 AM To: Declude.Virus@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] blocking eml and msg attachemtns With Declude 1.82, we haven't had any trouble with decoding and blocking viruses or banned attachments in attached .eml or .msg files. We wouldn't block them separately because of all of forwarded messages sent as attachments, both by us, AOL feedback loops, and by our users. Darin. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Tolmachoff (Lists)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <Declude.Virus@declude.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 1:32 PM Subject: [Declude.Virus] blocking eml and msg attachemtns What are others thoughts on blocking eml and msg attachments? If there is an eml or msg attachment which that has a executable or virus attachment, will Declude properly decode it and will it be scanned for viruses and banned attachments? John T eServices For You --- This E-mail came from the Declude.Virus mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.Virus". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.Virus mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.Virus". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.Virus mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.Virus". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.Virus mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.Virus". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.