Re[2]: New HTML engine?
Hello Marck, Will there be a feature to ignore by default, but load on request by let say clicking on the image while holding shift or something like that? -- Best regards, Mitja Perko Sorry to confuse. There will be a global ignore all option (don't even *think* about downloading) but if you want to see them at all, you'll have to manually verify each image. Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
Re[2]: New HTML engine?
Hello Marck, It will never be there in that form. It's just too dangerous. I understand that support for retrieving non-sent images will be added at some point *BUT* it will only get one image at a time and prompt for permission for *each* image. This is because not all images *are* images. What is the problem with that? If they are not images you display nothing. You detect by extension which image it should be, try to display it if you can, otherwise leave it alone. -- Best regards, Mitja Perko Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
Re[2]: New HTML engine?
Hello Jernej, That's not the problem. The problem is, that these images can be used for tracking - spammer can embed such image in text (with unique ID), and if the server gets the request for that image ID, it can confirm that the message was read - that the e-mail address exists. There are also other uses - eg. YahooGroups uses such images for advertizing, and every time you open the message with such inline image you get different AD... Thank you for clarification. I understand the problem now. Maybe one could have an icon to click and the images would get loaded. Or even filter enabling/disabling loading. I currently miss images, because I am subscribed to a newsletter that contains images. Now I usually go online when I receive the message to read it because of that. -- Best regards, Mitja Perko Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
Re[2]: New HTML engine?
Hi Jonathan, JA Then how would you explain viruses spreading via the .jpg and .gif JA formats? They have 'code' in the headers that the viewer (in most JA cases IE) reads and 'executes'... which causes infection. I've never heard of that and I don't think it's true; these formats have no executable code inside, and browsers make no attempt to execute them. However, what does exist is filenames with a double extension, such as naked.gif.exe or bigones.jpg.scr. Those filenames display as naked.gif and bigones.jpg in most programs, but are in fact executable, and some viruses make use of this. Regards, -Daan- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
Re[2]: New HTML engine?
Hi Peter, PP If you insist in the images you're free of open the HTML-page in PP your browser (which is BTW designed to display HTML pages) I sympathize with your plight of text-only e-mail, and I'd like to add that the true netpurist will only use a plain, fixed-width font. However, the Net has long been handed over to the savages, and HTML has become sort of an e-mail standard. So, if an HTML attachment is delivered with local images and all, I think TB should show them. Animated GIFs, too! :-) Remote images and other embedded objects should be optional - when they're turned off, perhaps TB could display some frivolous local pictures in their place. ZentrumDerArbeit.org Between your participation in this list, and (I'm sure) watching the Mannschaft, I have to wonder if you're still getting any Arbeit done! :-) Mit freundlichem Gruss, -Daan- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
Re[2]: New HTML engine?
Hi Marck, MDP erm... which it already does. I received such a mail only 30 minutes MDP ago. It was rendered perfectly. Oops! Now I see that I'd simply never had a HTML-message with the images attached. They all had links to remote images. Hence all the little red crosses! :) I've just sent myself a HTML message and it works fine indeed, thanks.. when they're turned off, perhaps TB could display some frivolous local pictures in their place. ... which it already does. Well, I said frivolous! ;-) Seriously, instead of those little red crosses, I'd much rather see some random pictures -eg. fractals- of the right size (if this size was specified in the html), so that the formatting is more similar to what was intended by the sender. Best, -Daan- Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
Re[2]: New HTML engine?
JA Guess I need to give an example... Take... erm... SubSeven. Has a JA small program that 'encapsulates' files... Run it onto a .jpg file it JA increases the .jpg file by maybe 300kb... file extension is *still* JA .jpg (no hidden extensions, or anything like that), and the file is JA now executable, and causes infection with the subseven trojan. Well, however it all works, or doesn't as the case may be, I can at least say this. I've gotten tons of trojans and viruses sent to me via email, and not a single one infected my system. I don't think they could have really gotten past TB with it made the way it is, but it never even got that far. Between Norton and ZAP, they both monitor and nail anything that even comes close to my system. I don't even have to think about it, they just automatically quarantine the stuff. I think TB could handle more features without becoming too much of a security risk. Hell, I also keep a copy of, God help me for admitting this, Incredimail on my system! Yeah, In know, it's wide open for attack by its nature, but still nothing gets through. I even get confused when people on mailing lists start talking about 'that darned virus' because I'd never noticed anything had happened. Oh, and I use Incredimail for the fun stuff it can do, in case you were wondering about my mental health. :) Hey, it *does* have some pretty nifty features. Best regards, Kurganmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
Re[2]: New HTML engine?
On Monday, June 10, 2002, Allie C Martin wrote: New HTML engine? ,- [Allie C Martin :: New HTML engine?] | | The most protection comes from you and not your software. | Don't do anything that may compromise your machine unless | it's necessary for you to do so. | | List Moderator | TB! v1.60q | Windows XP Pro `- That's why we call XP Pro: Swiss Cheese! Thanks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current Ver: 1.60q FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
