On Monday 03 January 2005 17:30, SnapafunFrank wrote:
> > If you run a local copy of an MTA like Postfix,
> >and route your ISP mail through that local MTA, you can push mail through
> > a virus checker prior to local delivery.
>
> Exactly what I believe ought to be available always. Let the more
Bryan Phinney wrote:
On Sunday 02 January 2005 20:01, SnapafunFrank wrote:
What I had in mind is that a " onboard " mail client be established that
would allow any email client to get the email via it, appoint klamav to
check the email coming through and going out at this point - basically
all e
On Sunday 02 January 2005 20:01, SnapafunFrank wrote:
> What I had in mind is that a " onboard " mail client be established that
> would allow any email client to get the email via it, appoint klamav to
> check the email coming through and going out at this point - basically
> all email passes " t
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 11:20:43 +, Graham Watkins wrote:
> deedee E wrote:
> >
> > I confess to some confusion about your problem. Is there some
> > reason you are forced to execute the worm-infested e-mail while
> > running Windows? Why not just treat it like junk mail and delete
> > it? Isn't
OK
I have been following this thread to hopefully find a suitable way of
appeasing those that call on me to help them with their SOHO setups. (
Myself included. )
How about we attack this problem by starting over so as to attempt to
save relevant emails that the original poster is trying to sav
On Sunday 02 January 2005 12:43 pm, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > There are no dodgy files .exe, .com, .pif or otherwise.
>
> The problem there is that virus writers realise that we now recognise
> these, so they use a variety of tricks to hide the .exe or whatever. I
> think it goes something like 'viru
On Sunday 02 January 2005 06:20, Graham Watkins wrote:
> > Yes. I have copies of all three on my Linux system. I also do not use
> > Windows for mail. You don't have to run windows to end up with your
> > email address being used by someone else who does have Windows and who
> > gets infected w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 02 Jan 2005 13:42, Graham Watkins wrote:
> And it's a pity that no-one knows how to make klammail work properly
> because that looked like a pretty good way of dealing with infected mails.
>
Why not try the kde mailing lists? I presume klam
Anne Wilson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 02 Jan 2005 11:43, Anne Wilson wrote:
The viruses do not come in on genuine mail. The headers may suggest that
they are from a reputable source, but they never are. Many are instantly
recognisable as emails that you have n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 02 Jan 2005 11:43, Anne Wilson wrote:
>
> The viruses do not come in on genuine mail. The headers may suggest that
> they are from a reputable source, but they never are. Many are instantly
> recognisable as emails that you have not solicit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 02 Jan 2005 11:20, Graham Watkins wrote:
>
> .evolution/mail/local/Inbox: Worm.Bagle.AP FOUND
> .evolution/mail/local/Inbox.sbd/Newbie: Worm.SomeFool.P FOUND
> (rest of scan snipped)
> --- SCAN SUMMARY ---
> Known viruses: 252
deedee E wrote:
>
I confess to some confusion about your problem. Is there some
reason you are forced to execute the worm-infested e-mail while
running Windows? Why not just treat it like junk mail and delete
it? Isn't it junk mail?
I'm not executing anything. I'm not doing anything with mail in w
Bryan Phinney wrote:
On Saturday 01 January 2005 09:39, Graham Watkins wrote:
Wish it were that simple. I'm not running a mail server with windows
clients. This is a dual booting stand alone machine and I never use
windows for downloading mail. (In fact I use it as little as possible.)
Do the na
Anne Wilson wrote:
I don't use Evo, but IIRC it uses mdir format, which means that each message
is in a separate file (mbox puts a whole mail folder into one file). This
being so, if you can identify which messages are the infected ones you can
safely delete them, leaving all others. Whichever
On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:39:24 +, Graham Watkins wrote:
> Wish it were that simple. I'm not running a mail server with
> windows clients. This is a dual booting stand alone machine and
> I never use windows for downloading mail. (In fact I use it as
> little as possible.)
I confess to some
On Saturday 01 January 2005 09:39, Graham Watkins wrote:
> Wish it were that simple. I'm not running a mail server with windows
> clients. This is a dual booting stand alone machine and I never use
> windows for downloading mail. (In fact I use it as little as possible.)
>
> Do the names Worm.ba
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 01 Jan 2005 15:33, Richard Urwin wrote:
> > Wish it were that simple. I'm not running a mail server with windows
> > clients. This is a dual booting stand alone machine and I never use
> > windows for downloading mail. (In fact I use it a
On Saturday 01 Jan 2005 2:39 pm, Graham Watkins wrote:
> JR wrote:
> > Hi Graham,
> >
> > I have yet to install clam av, but I just wanted to point out that
> > the viruses being detected are most likely windows viruses that
> > would pass through a linux system without being able to cause any
> >
I found a variation of SCO.A here
http://www.stacken.kth.se/lists/best-forestry/2004-01/msg00157.html
it's referenced as Worm.SCO.A
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Join the Club : http://w
Graham Watkins wrote:
Do the names Worm.bagle.AP, Worm.Somefool.P, SCO.A mean anything here?
As I mentioned, klamav claims to be able to quarantine messages
containing viruses and worms but the component klammail doesn't seem to
exist on my system - ideas, anyone?
I've just done a search on Syma
JR wrote:
Hi Graham,
I have yet to install clam av, but I just wanted to point out that the viruses
being detected are most likely windows viruses that would pass through a
linux system without being able to cause any harm.
The reason clam av detects these is because linux is often used as a mai
Hi Graham,
I have yet to install clam av, but I just wanted to point out that the viruses
being detected are most likely windows viruses that would pass through a
linux system without being able to cause any harm.
The reason clam av detects these is because linux is often used as a mail
server
Hi Y'all and a happy new year,
My first crisis of the year began this morning. I finally got round to
installing clam anti virus and Klamav. My first scan brought up about
half a dozen worms hiding out in my mailboxes. I quarantined the mail
files which cost me all the mail I had stored on mozi
23 matches
Mail list logo
