I took a look at that program; best I can tell, it sends email out, perhaps
propagating itself.
I don't know much more; I'm not a very good reverse engineer. I noticed however that
the headers are fudged; perhaps this is so OE will open the file as an executable
without asking you. I am
Hi!
It seems that some hours ago some more or nice person (or software)
sent out a virus using my email address:
* The From: line is wrong:
From: Lutz.Jaenicke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My full name (which is always inserted by mutt :-) does not contain
a dot.
* The User-Agent: Header is missing:
Yeah, wasn't saying it was anything you did; just bugs me when people do that crap.
I am not really easy to affect either, since I use a crappy graphical mail client
under Linux; nonetheless, I understand quite a few people on this list may use OE or
similar.
David Bronaugh
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 01:36:56AM -0700, David Bronaugh wrote:
Yeah, wasn't saying it was anything you did; just bugs me when people do that crap.
My comment wasn't targeted at you.
As I do post to this list quite often and as a member of the openssl
developers team I felt that I should give a
Thanks for the detailed report. Please try this patch:
it works.
arne
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated
Hey there,
I am not really easy to affect either, since I use a crappy graphical
mail client under Linux; nonetheless, I understand quite a few people on
this list may use OE or similar.
I am afraid that this statement is quite correct :-(
I would personally +1 any proposal to have the
From: Lutz.Jaenicke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Border
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 07:35:57 +0200 (MET DST)
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
name=prehome_07[1].jpg
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: MtV005wz
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 10:53:38AM +0200, Michael Bell wrote:
I read RFC 1700 and I don't see why we should get problem if we rename
internet 7 in crypto/objects/objects.txt from mail to
internetMail. Nobody should ever use a direct reference to these
#defines. Only objects.txt would use this
Lutz Jaenicke schrieb:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 10:53:38AM +0200, Michael Bell wrote:
I read RFC 1700 and I don't see why we should get problem if we rename
internet 7 in crypto/objects/objects.txt from mail to
internetMail. Nobody should ever use a direct reference to these
#defines.
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 02:26:06PM +0200, Michael Bell wrote:
Lutz Jaenicke schrieb:
I come to the conclusion that I prefer to leave mail for use in the
internet 7 class.
I have no problem with this but what do you want to with the short name
for an RFC822mailbox? Do you want to ignore
Lutz Jaenicke schrieb:
Please ignore my ignorance, but I just had a second look into RFC1274
and I could not find any reference about mail being a short name
for rfc822Mailbox.
See: RFC 2798 -- 9.1.3 -- 4th attribute
So I think both names are allowed.
I also see a document from Entrust
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 02:51:49PM +0200, Michael Bell wrote:
Lutz Jaenicke schrieb:
Please ignore my ignorance, but I just had a second look into RFC1274
and I could not find any reference about mail being a short name
for rfc822Mailbox.
See: RFC 2798 -- 9.1.3 -- 4th attribute
Lutz Jaenicke schrieb:
I also see a document from Entrust (Entrust Directory Schema Definition)
where email is used as short name for emailAddress so perhaps it is
allowed but I found this nowhere else.
This document I also found during my research, but that source is not
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Geoff Thorpe wrote:
I would personally +1 any proposal to have the listserver block any posts
that;
(a) contain attachments
(b) aren't ASCII (ie. block HTML, RTF, etc)
Anyone needing to distribute files can find some other legitimate way to do
it.
Attachments
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 10:46:58AM +0200, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 01:36:56AM -0700, David Bronaugh wrote:
Yeah, wasn't saying it was anything you did; just bugs me when people do that crap.
My comment wasn't targeted at you.
As I do post to this list quite often and as
Hi,
we found today a big problem with the DNs which OpenSSL displays because
our application (OpenCA) produce DNs which are conform to the
directorystandards but OpenSSL interprets them in the opposite order.
What does this mean?
Here an example:
The root of our directory is the following:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Michael Bell wrote:
Hi,
we found today a big problem with the DNs which OpenSSL displays because
our application (OpenCA) produce DNs which are conform to the
directorystandards but OpenSSL interprets them in the opposite order.
What does this mean?
Here an example:
Andreas Sterbenz wrote:
For the Sun JSSE provider, the default enabled protocols are SSLv3,
TLSv1, and the pseudo protocol SSLv2Hello. The latter means that client
hello messages are sent/ accepted in SSLv2 format. This is for better
error diagnostic when talking to SSLv2 only
Trying to install OpenSSL 0.9.6c on a Macintosh running MacOS X 10.1.3
with all the latest security patches, I get a persistent error when
testing the rc4 ciphers. As suggested, I disabled all compiler
optimization (-O3), with no effect. Disabling the rc4 cipher set
(no-rc4) allows the rest
19 matches
Mail list logo
