On Saturday 07 June 2003 17:30, Carroll Grigsby wrote:
On Saturday 07 June 2003 02:39 pm, Damian Gatabria wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 17:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
Ooops - is he saying that he has been reading for two years? Did he
get the virus and think it came from us?
Anne
DJ Yes Linux can have spaces, but when you are typing a file name
DJ containing spaces in the command line you must wrap the entire
DJ file name in quotes
Thanks - learn something every day here. :-)
Personally, i think linux handles spaces better than that other OS that
forced them on us
Hello Derek,
Sunday, June 8, 2003, 11:55:31 AM, you wrote:
DJ Yes this is the key. Regardless of the extension name a file only
DJ becomes executable when it is made so.
Excellent!
DJ No. 'Open' simply means it will look at the mime type and start
DJ the application at the top of the list in
On Friday 06 June 2003 17:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
Ooops - is he saying that he has been reading for two years? Did he
get the virus and think it came from us?
Anne
Probably, he thinks Linux has no documentation... so it mst
be true! and besides, who knows how many viruses does
Lunix have?!
On Saturday 07 Jun 2003 7:39 pm, Damian Gatabria wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 17:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
Ooops - is he saying that he has been reading for two years? Did
he get the virus and think it came from us?
Anne
Probably, he thinks Linux has no documentation... so it mst
be
On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 04:39, Damian Gatabria wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 17:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
Ooops - is he saying that he has been reading for two years? Did he
get the virus and think it came from us?
Anne
Probably, he thinks Linux has no documentation... so it mst
be true!
On Saturday 07 June 2003 02:39 pm, Damian Gatabria wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 17:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
Ooops - is he saying that he has been reading for two years? Did he
get the virus and think it came from us?
Anne
Probably, he thinks Linux has no documentation... so it mst
be
On Sat, 2003-06-07 at 13:23, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 04:39, Damian Gatabria wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 17:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
Ooops - is he saying that he has been reading for two years? Did he
get the virus and think it came from us?
Anne
Probably, he
On Saturday 07 Jun 2003 10:03 pm, Aron Smith wrote:
On Sat, 2003-06-07 at 13:23, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 04:39, Damian Gatabria wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 17:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
Ooops - is he saying that he has been reading for two years?
Did he get the virus
On Sat, 2003-06-07 at 20:39, Damian Gatabria wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 17:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
Ooops - is he saying that he has been reading for two years? Did he
get the virus and think it came from us?
Anne
Probably, he thinks Linux has no documentation... so it mst
be true!
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It has an attachment titled Address-denon021122.WAB.scr which is 70.5k, the
entire message is 96.8k. Looks like one of the rapidly spreading new
virus's. Second suspicious mail I've gotten
On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 07:53:06PM -0500, Chris wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It has an attachment titled Address-denon021122.WAB.scr which is 70.5k, the
entire message is 96.8k. Looks like one of the rapidly
On Thursday 05 June 2003 08:33 pm, Todd Slater said,:
On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 07:53:06PM -0500, Chris wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
Yup, just got one. Roadrunner actually caught it before it got to me.
Todd
I got one of these this morning. It's sad to see my Web site's name used in such
a destructive manner. I guess it gives a new, more literal meaning to the term
'viral marketing' :(
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003 19:53:06 -0500, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the
On Thursday 05 June 2003 07:53 pm, Chris wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It has an attachment titled Address-denon021122.WAB.scr which is 70.5k, the
entire message is 96.8k. Looks like one of the rapidly spreading
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 10:53, Chris wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It's either Bugbear.B or Sobig.H doing it - so someone's been not only
using an M$ mail package, but they're infected as well...(and they won't
know
On Thursday 05 June 2003 10:01 pm, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 10:53, Chris wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It's either Bugbear.B or Sobig.H doing it - so someone's been not only
I got one of each
Hello JoeHill,
Thursday, June 5, 2003, 9:41:02 PM, you wrote:
Wouldn't it be relatively easy to write a script virus as an
attachment and do the kinds of things that happen in Win?
J no for two reasons. one you'd have to execute it yourself, so it's not a
J true virus or trojan unless it can
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 7:40 am, rikona wrote:
Hello JoeHill,
Thursday, June 5, 2003, 9:41:02 PM, you wrote:
Wouldn't it be relatively easy to write a script virus as an
attachment and do the kinds of things that happen in Win?
J no for two reasons. one you'd have to execute it yourself, so
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 2:55 am, Dennis Myers wrote:
On Thursday 05 June 2003 07:53 pm, Chris wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It has an attachment titled Address-denon021122.WAB.scr which is
70.5k, the entire
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 3:01 am, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 10:53, Chris wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It's either Bugbear.B or Sobig.H doing it - so someone's been not
only using an M$ mail
Anne Wilson wrote:
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 3:01 am, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
but I've been shocked at the fact that over the past 2
weeks I must have had about 10 coming onto this box.
Anne
How do you know you have had viruses ?
John
--
John Richard Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Want to buy
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 12:01 pm, John Richard Smith wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 3:01 am, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
but I've been shocked at the fact that over the past 2
weeks I must have had about 10 coming onto this box.
Anne
How do you know you have had viruses ?
Anne Wilson wrote:
Yes - but the point I was making was that the address book it was
accessing contains a host of addresses from this list.
and, if this is true, a gathering of names that have
received said infected email should show who is infected.
wake up, people...
peace out.
tc,hago.
email supposedly from Newbie.
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It has an attachment titled Address-denon021122.WAB.scr which is 70.5k,
the
entire message is 96.8k. Looks like one of the rapidly spreading new
virus's
On Friday 06 June 2003 01:53 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
One thing that W2K can do that *nix can't: Make a directory unreadable to
anyone. I've used that to hold virus code for analysis.
I'm no expert but with Linuxs' permission capabilities why couldn't you do
that? Just curious! :-)
--
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 7:26 pm, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 01:53 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
One thing that W2K can do that *nix can't: Make a directory unreadable to
anyone. I've used that to hold virus code for analysis.
I'm no expert but with Linuxs' permission capabilities
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 8:00 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 7:26 pm, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 01:53 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
One thing that W2K can do that *nix can't: Make a directory
unreadable to anyone. I've used that to hold virus code for
-Mensaje original-
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de Ian Trickett
Enviado el: Viernes, 06 de Junio de 2003 11:21 a.m.
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: [newbie] Suspicious email supposedly from Newbie.
Bugbear.B
Another very good reason
Loosely translate he is saying
Saquenme of its damn list I have been two years requesting it
-Original Message-
From: Anne Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 1:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Suspicious email supposedly from Newbie.
On Friday
-
From: Anne Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 1:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Suspicious email supposedly from Newbie.
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 5:43 pm, Walter Anticona wrote:
Saquenme de su maldita lista
Llevo dos años pidiendolo
I beg your
: Anne Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 1:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Suspicious email supposedly from Newbie.
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 5:43 pm, Walter Anticona wrote:
Saquenme de su maldita lista
Llevo dos años pidiendolo
I beg your pardon
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 8:07 pm, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 8:00 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 7:26 pm, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 01:53 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
One thing that W2K can do that *nix can't: Make a directory
unreadable to
On Friday 06 June 2003 04:26 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
Absolutely nothing. Until I decide to have a look at it, change the
permissions and open it very carefully. Until then I know that if I click
on the wrong thing I'm not going to infect myself or anyone else.
In 'Nix you can set it to not
On Friday 06 June 2003 03:00 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
Root can always read everything, even when the permisions are set to
disallow it.
I'll have to disagree with that. Here, when I remove all permissions from any
file or folder in /root, even root can not see it or enter it
Mayperhaps
* Ronald J. Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] [030606 15:01]:
I'll have to disagree with that. Here, when I remove all permissions from any
file or folder in /root, even root can not see it or enter it
Mayperhaps your setup is different?
Can someone else verify this please? Thanks!
Here, with
On Friday 06 Jun 2003 9:49 pm, Ronald J. Hall wrote:
On Friday 06 June 2003 04:26 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
Absolutely nothing. Until I decide to have a look at it, change the
permissions and open it very carefully. Until then I know that if I click
on the wrong thing I'm not going to infect
On Friday 06 June 2003 05:44 pm, Richard Urwin wrote:
It had a .txt extension, so yes as a matter of fact. I'm just paranoid :-)
Rich, I'm with ya buddy! The question is, are we paranoid enough? :-)
--
/\
Dark Lord
On Friday 06 June 2003 05:26 pm, Jan Wilson wrote:
Here, with Mandrake 9.1, I can create a directory in /root, copy a
text file into it, chmod both to 0, then (as root) cd into that
directory, and read the file. I then deleted both file and directory
while the permissions were d- on
On Friday 06 June 2003 04:01 pm, Anne Wilson wrote:
Thanks - I'm not a lot wiser, but I see he got his answer. Funny,
though, I'm sure I know that name from somewhere.
Anne
Anne:
The name rang a bell here, too, so I took a look through my Trash folder. It
appears that Walter Anticona got
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 21:18, Carroll Grigsby wrote:
I'm sitting here thinking about this whole incident as some sort of
transformed Fawlty Towers episode with the part of Walter played by John
Cleese.
Hmmm... I wonder if Walter's wonderful and beautiful MS Windows got infected
by
Hello Stephen,
Thursday, June 5, 2003, 7:35:34 PM, you wrote:
SK usual McAfee and Symantec that MOST people use are quite
SK ineffective to catch them right off the bat;
Speaking of bats, I use TheBat! in Windoze for email. FAR better,
safer, and more private than any M$ email software. It,
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003 20:15:06 -0700
rikona [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
A question: many viruses are nothing more than an executable script.
In Win, it is rare that one needs to run a script, and a 'good thing
to do' is to simply disable the scripting capability. But - in Linux,
scripting looks
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 12:19, Greg Meyer wrote:
On Thursday 05 June 2003 10:01 pm, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 10:53, Chris wrote:
Has anyone else gotten an email today with the subject:
Re: [newbie] OT - PCLO offline because of SCO!
It's either Bugbear.B or Sobig.H
44 matches
Mail list logo
