Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Jason Brooke]

> Right. You're still using Outlook on a technical mailing list.

So? You're still a moron - yet that doesn't stop you.
Besides, he's using Outlook Express, not Outlook

> message still looks bad, has no reference headers (cf. "broken list
> archive") and so on.

Looks fine from here. Alpha-numeric chars strung together forming cohesive
sentences - yup, lookin good.
Oh look, a reference header too. You said there wasn't, but there is.
Remarkable!

> Been there before, no need to discuss this here,

Yet you still felt you had to


jason

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Robin S . Socha]

Quoting Einar Bordewich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > * Hubbard, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?
> >
> > Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar
> > abomination and I won't show you the difference.
> 
> 
> So what you are saying, is that to be a good unix admin, you can't
> use Windows?  I consider myself a pretty ok unix admin, but I can't
> live without my W2K laptop.  It does it's job, and my linux machines
> are doing theirs. Something I prefer doing on my W2K laptop, and
> then agin other I prefer doing on one of my linux'es.

I said Outlook. This message is being written under Win98.

> Just another "MAC is bether than PC", "FreeBSD rulez linux" etc.
> Can't beat them, join them!

Can beat them. Have beaten them. Will not be assimilated.

> BTW: I know my way around on Windows, MAC, Linux, FreeBSD, NextSTEP,
> etc  and feel pretty good about it ;-)

Right. You're still using Outlook on a technical mailing list. Your
message still looks bad, has no reference headers (cf. "broken list
archive") and so on. Been there before, no need to discuss this here,
really. Please?
-- 
Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
@40003a2ee04c23b0f0a4 delivery 8351: deferral: 
Connected_to_168.126.229.1_but_greeting_failed./Remote_host_said:_421_[nMail_1.045_(Windows_NT/2000)_SMTP_Server]_-_Server_too_busy,_retry_later/

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Einar Bordewich]

I'll guess MS has fixed that problem, since my OE5.5 did'nt freeze or react
at all on that mail. But then again, I'm preety eager on fixes for my W2K
machine.

--

IDG New MediaEinar Bordewich
Development Manager  Phone: +47 2336 1420
E-Mail:  eibo(at)newmedia.no


- Original Message -
From: "Chris Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: Outlook Express Prank


> On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
> > I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
> > joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
> > Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
> > to destroy.
> >
>
> Everyone needs to take a deep breath and just relax. The message I posted
was
> in the context of a discussion of certain types of legal addresses that
mutt
> didn't handle correctly. As an aside, I posted a message with an address
in it
> that caused Outlook Express to lock up. It didn't "destroy" anything. It
wasn't
> a virus. It didn't erase files. It simply made it necessary to kill
Outlook
> Express and restart it.
>
> If you use Windows (and I do), it's a fact of life that programs lock up
> frequently and unexpectedly. You kill them, or sometimes you have to
reboot
> (which in this case you didn't), and life goes on.
>
> So please spare me all this talk of "attacks" and "vicitms" and so forth.
If
> you want to get angry at someone, get angry at the Microsoft software
engineers
> who put out an MUA that can be locked up by messages containing certain
> sequences of ASCII characters.
>
> Chris
>

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Einar Bordewich]

- Original Message -
From: "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Qmail-List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: Outlook Express Prank


> * Hubbard, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?
>
> Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
> and I won't show you the difference.


So what you are saying, is that to be a good unix admin, you can't use
Windows?
I consider myself a pretty ok unix admin, but I can't live without my W2K
laptop.
It does it's job, and my linux machines are doing theirs. Something I prefer
doing on my W2K laptop, and then agin other I prefer doing on one of my
linux'es.

Just another "MAC is bether than PC", "FreeBSD rulez linux" etc. Can't
beat them, join them!

BTW: I know my way around on Windows, MAC, Linux, FreeBSD, NextSTEP, etc
and feel pretty good about it ;-)
--

IDG New MediaEinar Bordewich
Development Manager  Phone: +47 2336 1420
E-Mail:  eibo(at)newmedia.no

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[James Stevens]

Laugh, I have tried In vein I might add as anyone knows. 

But still they persist.. (sigh)

BTW- Best way to not get a VBS worm is to add a couple of filters and 
rework your reg. But I don't recommend that for the light of heart.. 
hehehe

--JT

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 12/12/00, 11:22:18 AM, Aaron "L." Meehan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote 
regarding Re: Outlook Express Prank:


> Quoting James Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Without going into a 20 page technical look at every bug here's some
> > simple tips even biggeners should know.
> >
> > 1. Don't use the 'Preview' plane.
> > 2. Don't let or set Outlook to open messages automatically.
> > 3. Don't open any executable or any other microsoft attachement unless
> > it's from someone you know and trust. VBS bugs are kewl but are a 'PAIN
> ^^

> Well there is precisely the biggest bitch about Lookout: most VBS
> worms you get _are_ from someone you know and trust, like your mom,
> since the worms scour Lookout's blasted address book, eh?  Note that I
> could write a shell script to do the same thing to mutt, but the
> problem is that the unwashed masses are the ones running Upchuck
> products.  We strongly recommend our customers not use it,
> unfortunately many do.

> Aaron

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Aaron L. Meehan]

Quoting James Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Without going into a 20 page technical look at every bug here's some 
> simple tips even biggeners should know.
> 
> 1. Don't use the 'Preview' plane.
> 2. Don't let or set Outlook to open messages automatically.
> 3. Don't open any executable or any other microsoft attachement unless 
> it's from someone you know and trust. VBS bugs are kewl but are a 'PAIN 
^^

Well there is precisely the biggest bitch about Lookout: most VBS
worms you get _are_ from someone you know and trust, like your mom,
since the worms scour Lookout's blasted address book, eh?  Note that I
could write a shell script to do the same thing to mutt, but the
problem is that the unwashed masses are the ones running Upchuck
products.  We strongly recommend our customers not use it,
unfortunately many do.

Aaron

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Jason Brooke]

Just when you thought he couldn't possibly more clearly define the word
moronic through his typed dialogue...

jason

This email brought to you by Outlook Express - accept it


> Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
> and I won't show you the difference.
>
> Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Robin S. Socha 

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Alex Pennace]

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:45:40PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
>   I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
> joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
> Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
> to destroy. 
> 
>   Pranksters usually enjoy the power of destruction they gain with a
> little knowledge. 

While I'm not a prankster, I find it unnecessary to refrain from
posting any text that may cause Outlook Express to crash. I am
operating within standards, and I forced no one to use a broken
MUA. Its rather unprofessional to come onto the Internet and complain
when something of yours blows up.

Outlook is broken. Fix it instead of jury rigging the Internet to work
around it.

 PGP signature

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[James Stevens]

Well let's see.. Been Managing Unix systems for about 5 years now .. Did 
start on Mac's then Windows then Unix so yeah I kinda went the long way 
but I have been using Outlook Express almost since the beging.. It has 
just been recently that I have started using other MUA's ... However I 
don't run your stock Outlook Express either. I know of just about every 
trick that can be played on Outlook and Outlook express.. Although if 
anyones using Outlook then there much braver than I am. Hell I can tell 
you which bugs/tricks work on which versions.

Without going into a 20 page technical look at every bug here's some 
simple tips even biggeners should know.

1. Don't use the 'Preview' plane.
2. Don't let or set Outlook to open messages automatically.
3. Don't open any executable or any other microsoft attachement unless 
it's from someone you know and trust. VBS bugs are kewl but are a 'PAIN 
IN THE ASS'.
4. Know your damm system.. Spacifically know where the mail is stored on 
your computer.. It's simple to go delete the damm inbox.mbx file when one 
pesky message is bugging you. If your good you can even get rid of the 
one message without loosing the rest of your inbox.
5. Goto windowsupdate.microsoft.com and make sure you have all the 
security patches for your current version. Microsoft is famous for 
releasing about a dozzen security patches a month for OutLook and OutLook 
Express amoung other things.

And Number 6... Use common sense and quit belly aching when someone 
screws up.

If someone purposely screwed you up then fix your computer then go and 
send them a nice email thanking them for the 'grand experienece' .. If 
they wana be pricks then leave them be, there not worth getting heart 
burn or teary eye'd over.. If you wana put yourself down to there level 
for pay back then hey, more power to ya.


As you can tell I'm not a Microsoft Lover but I'm not a hatter either. 
Microsoft has it's up's and down's (Okay, more downs than up's) just like 
any of the other Major OS's around the world but if your gona use it then 
you'd better dam well learn it and most of all learn how to deal with it.

I think just about every admin on this list would agree with that last 
statement, however I expect varying flames regarding the rest (grin)

--JT

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 12/11/00, 1:19:27 PM, Robin "S." Socha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding 
Re: Outlook Express Prank:


> * Hubbard, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?

> Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
> and I won't show you the difference.

> Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
> <http://learn.to/attribute/>
> <http://learn.to/sign/>
> <http://learn.to/edit_messages/>
> --
> Robin S. Socha <http://socha.net/LB/>

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Amitai Schlair]

martin langhoff wrote:

> We are on the *internet*. Welcome.

Precisely. If you must use software that cannot handle the full spectrum
of demands the Internet presents, don't blame the Internet.

- Amitai

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Chris Johnson]

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
>   I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
> joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
> Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
> to destroy. 
> 

Everyone needs to take a deep breath and just relax. The message I posted was
in the context of a discussion of certain types of legal addresses that mutt
didn't handle correctly. As an aside, I posted a message with an address in it
that caused Outlook Express to lock up. It didn't "destroy" anything. It wasn't
a virus. It didn't erase files. It simply made it necessary to kill Outlook
Express and restart it.

If you use Windows (and I do), it's a fact of life that programs lock up
frequently and unexpectedly. You kill them, or sometimes you have to reboot
(which in this case you didn't), and life goes on.

So please spare me all this talk of "attacks" and "vicitms" and so forth. If
you want to get angry at someone, get angry at the Microsoft software engineers
who put out an MUA that can be locked up by messages containing certain
sequences of ASCII characters.

Chris

RE: Outlook Express Prank

[Goran Blazic]

Exactly my point...
I wouldn't say for myself, that I am a competent sysadmin... After all I
take care of only five servers running qmail on Linux...
The company I work for uses Exchange, so I am forced to use Outlook (2k). I
would use anything else, but the smtp port is closed to the outside... so I
have a problem, right? :)

Goran

> I'm a competent sysadmin on Solaris & linux and
> I use Outlook 2k.  So it has less features and
> virtually no standards adherence compared to
> other MUAs mentioned on this list, big deal, it
> is the corporate standard at my company, I have
> no alternatives for connecting to the corporate
> Exchange server, and it lets me read this list
> which helps me keep quite a few qmail boxes running
> very happily.  Either way, my raggedy MUA has
> nothing to do with a great MTA.

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:19:27PM +0100,
  "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
> 

I took a look at the attribute page because I had had a recent discussion
with someone over whether or not date and/or time belong in attributions
in usenet posts.

While there is some useful information there, the presentation is poor.
There seems to be a lot of javascript on the web page. There seems
to be a needless break into more than one page for this information.
The first page had less than a paragraph about attribution. The rest of
the first page seemed to be pretty much advertising related.

If there are other sites with similar information, but with better presentation,
those might make a better reference to give to people. I find it hard to
take their recommendations about attribution lines seriously, when the
web page design is so bad.

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Hubbard, David]

I'm a competent sysadmin on Solaris & linux and
I use Outlook 2k.  So it has less features and
virtually no standards adherence compared to
other MUAs mentioned on this list, big deal, it
is the corporate standard at my company, I have
no alternatives for connecting to the corporate
Exchange server, and it lets me read this list
which helps me keep quite a few qmail boxes running
very happily.  Either way, my raggedy MUA has
nothing to do with a great MTA.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Robin S. Socha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 4:19 PM
To: Qmail-List
Subject: Re: Outlook Express Prank


Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
and I won't show you the difference.

Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
<http://learn.to/attribute/>
<http://learn.to/sign/>
<http://learn.to/edit_messages/>
-- 
Robin S. Socha <http://socha.net/LB/>

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Justin Bell]

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:03:20PM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote:
# On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
# > Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
# > wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
# > unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
# > expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. 
# 
# No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
# for their MUA.

Also, how would we know what the string is had no one posted it?



-- 
Justin Bell

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[martin langhoff]

Felix von Leitner wrote:
> What in the seven hells are you talking about?
> Who did what prank that caused Outlook to barf and die?
> 
> And if that happened as you insinuate above, why would you blame him and
> not Outlook?  

Felix,

please, inform yourself and you'll save time. A few hours ago some
jokester ( Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ) sent a msg that read

> If you want to have fun with Outlook Express users, put this in your signature:
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[replace QUOTE with " ... I didn't know if were using a susceptible MUA]

which is a valid address as per RFC822 -- and a recipe for OE lockup. A
few OE users on this list were hit. Chis knew what he was doing, and I'd
bet he did it for fun. 

Now, however crappy OE may be, locking people's machines for fun is not
a behaviour to be encouraged. 


martin

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[martin langhoff]

Felix von Leitner wrote:

> Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
> mailing list about an Unix MTA?

We are on the *internet*. Welcome. 

Many people, many machines, lots of strange company policies, personal
choices and other constraints. Please refrain from making assumptions on
how somebody else's machine/software should be run, because we are not
here to judge. We're here to share. 

And, of course, you can criticize my MTA and its setup. And even my
MUA. But please, people, it's not funny to kill it!

The way *anyone* runs his/her boxes is not the *right* way. Is just
his/her way. We're discussing qmail, and I'm asking people not to post
things that will make some software blow up. 

I don't know who's to blame, but please, lets be good netizens.



martin

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Robin S. Socha]

* Hubbard, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What does the MUA have to do with an MTA? 

Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
and I won't show you the difference.

Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:



-- 
Robin S. Socha 

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[martin langhoff]

Alex,

this is not a call for censorchip, please! We are on a public list! 

I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
to destroy. 

Pranksters usually enjoy the power of destruction they gain with a
little knowledge. 

Of course you can be a prankster. Just not here, please. There are
people working, who that rely on this list for discussion and for help
when their mail servers act up. They don't enjoy being the victims of a
prank, whoever clever it might be. 

I'm asking people not to attack other people's programs just because we
know how to. We should not be script kiddies, y'know. 


martin

Alex Pennace wrote:
> No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
> for their MUA.

RE: Outlook Express Prank

[Hubbard, David]

What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?

-Original Message-
From: Felix von Leitner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 3:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Outlook Express Prank



Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
mailing list about an Unix MTA?

Probably not.  Windoze people usually don't blame themselves.

Sheesh.

Felix

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Felix von Leitner]

Thus spake martin langhoff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>   this is not reasonable.

>   Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
> wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
> unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
> expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. 

>   Please do you some responsibility towards this tiny community. Thanks.

What in the seven hells are you talking about?
Who did what prank that caused Outlook to barf and die?

And if that happened as you insinuate above, why would you blame him and
not Outlook?  Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
mailing list about an Unix MTA?

Probably not.  Windoze people usually don't blame themselves.

Sheesh.

Felix

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Nathan J. Mehl]

In the immortal words of Alex Pennace ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
> for their MUA.

At what point, exactly, did asking someone to act like (a) a
professional and (b) a decent human being become censorship?

Oh, right, the same point at which this list became about adolescent
chest-thumping and OS/MUA advocacy instead of qmail.  Silly me.

I think we'll just add me to the list of disgusted unsubscribers.
Someone please drop me a line if the kids here ever grow up, eh?

-n, unix user since before you figured out how to cop an attitude, thanks.

--<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I've got more than one membership / to more than one club
and I owe my life / to the people that I love.  (--Ani DiFranco)
--

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Mike Jackson]

Hi,
 Could somebody resend me the original post concerning this? It seems I
deleted it on accident and it may have been removed from the list
archives...

Thanks,
Mike

Re: Outlook Express Prank

[Alex Pennace]

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
>   Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
> wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
> unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
> expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. 

No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
for their MUA.

 PGP signature

Outlook Express Prank

[martin langhoff]

boys and girls,

this is not reasonable.

Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. 

Please do you some responsibility towards this tiny community. Thanks.





martin