Hello Werner Hintze,
On Friday, December 03, 1999, 20:55:47 (GMT +07:00) you told us:
>> Means, Happy99 only active if the program using Winsock32.dll, right.
>> Outlook97/98 use this socket, that's why Outlook97/98 infected by this
>> viruses.
WH> Does this mean that The Bat doesn't use winso
> the message wasn't there, so Compuserve must have detected it in the mean
time
> and deleted it.
<100% OT>
without telling you ?! nice solution ... :-/
i would hope that if they scan mail for viruses (viri ?) they'd send on the
message without the attachment and a warning to tell the addresse
Hello Kevin Boylan,
On Friday, December 03, 1999, 21:35:48 (GMT +07:00) you told us:
[ ... ]
KB> It was interesting too, because it was at work that I downloaded
KB> it and NAV caught it. At work I don't have messages deleted from
KB> the server so I can still download them from home.
On Friday, December 03, 1999, 2:24:13 PM Syafril Hermansyah ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> Means, Happy99 only active if the program using Winsock32.dll, right.
> Outlook97/98 use this socket, that's why Outlook97/98 infected by this
> viruses.
Does this mean that The Bat doesn't use winsock32.d
Hi,
>>> That's OK, because most people will save it before running it.
>>> Question : what happen if you try to run it directly from mail
>>> attachment (without saving it first) ?
KB>> Still catches it because it has to be decoded first before it can
KB>> do anything.
> Good, you're l
Hello Kevin Boylan,
On Friday, December 03, 1999, 21:08:35 (GMT +07:00) you told us:
KB>>> NAV picked up on it as soon as I tried to save it out to a
KB>>> directory.
>> That's OK, because most people will save it before running it.
>> Question : what happen if you try to run
Hi,
KB>> NAV picked up on it as soon as I tried to save it out to a
KB>> directory.
> That's OK, because most people will save it before running it.
> Question : what happen if you try to run it directly from mail
> attachment (without saving it first) ?
Still catches it because
Hello Kevin Boylan,
On Friday, December 03, 1999, 20:26:02 (GMT +07:00) you told us:
>> Sorry Leif, I have other opinion. AFAIK Happy99.exe is a Trojan
>> Virus (Hoax ?), which infected to mailer with MAPI capable such
>> Outlook97/98/2000, Outlook Express 4/5, Exchange Client. Luckyly
Hello Werner Hintze,
On Friday, December 03, 1999, 19:28:22 (GMT +07:00) you told us:
>> AFAIK Happy99.exe is a Trojan Virus (Hoax ?), which infected to
>> mailer with MAPI capable such Outlook97/98/2000, Outlook Express 4/5,
>> Exchange Client.
WH> I think, that's not true. I have h
Hi,
> Sorry Leif, I have other opinion. AFAIK Happy99.exe is a Trojan
> Virus (Hoax ?), which infected to mailer with MAPI capable such
> Outlook97/98/2000, Outlook Express 4/5, Exchange Client. Luckyly The
> Bat! not MAPI capable, yet; in the next version if The Bat! have MAPI
> capabil
John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just to keep us on our toes, Norton has failed to identify
> the Happy99/SKA attachment, even with up to date definitions.
> I checked to be sure that the definitions contained the
> information and then ran NAV, which scanned right past the
> worm.
On Friday, December 03, 1999, 12:47:19 PM Syafril Hermansyah ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> AFAIK Happy99.exe is a Trojan Virus (Hoax ?), which infected to
> mailer with MAPI capable such Outlook97/98/2000, Outlook Express 4/5,
> Exchange Client.
I think, that's not true. I have here a
Hello Leif Gregory,
On Friday, December 03, 1999, 17:55:43 (GMT +07:00) you told us:
LG> I think you are forgetting something though. The message sent to
LG> the list had Happy99.exe UUencoded, therefore a separate file was
LG> not saved to the attach directory. If you want to see NAV go r
John,
I think you are forgetting something though. The message sent to the
list had Happy99.exe UUencoded, therefore a separate file was not
saved to the attach directory. If you want to see NAV go red with
warnings, right click the Happy99.exe file in the e-mail and try to
save it (provided you
Leif,
Thursday, Thursday, December 02, 1999, Leif wrote:
LG> Mike,
LG> Oh man...
Just to keep us on our toes, Norton has failed to identify
the Happy99/SKA attachment, even with up to date definitions.
I checked to be sure that the definitions contained the
information and then ra
Mike,
Oh man...
Ok, if anybody ran the attachment to Mike's last post called
Happy99.exe, please read the below article I wrote for my e-zine when
Happy99/SKA first appeared. It explains what you need to do to get rid
of it.
If any of you did run the Happy99.exe attachment, shame on you. NE
16 matches
Mail list logo
