RE: ..why _never_ answer off-list: "Q3a51q.jpg.exe" ;-)

RE: ..why _never_ answer off-list: "Q3a51q.jpg.exe" ;-)

[Daniel Chemko]

Why you never use Outlook on a Linux ML! haha, sucker! (As I type this
from Outlook XP.. *doh*)

-----Original Message-----
From: Arnt Karlsen [mailto:arnt@c2i.net] 
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 4:59 PM
To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: ..why _never_ answer off-list: "Q3a51q.jpg.exe" ;-)

Hi,

I found this in my spam dump.  ;-) 

Re: ..why _never_ answer off-list: "Q3a51q.jpg.exe" ;-)

[Arnt Karlsen]

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:11:52 -0700, 
"Daniel Chemko" <dchemko@smgtec.com> wrote in message 
<7C9884991ADAE0479C14F10C858BCDF52E35BB@alderaan.smgtec.com>:

> Why you never use Outlook on a Linux ML! haha, sucker! (As I type this
> from Outlook XP.. *doh*)

..oh yeah, we all goof:  we could learn from the ipcop'ers. ;-)

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:59:22 -0700, 
Mail Delivery System <Mailer-Daemon@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote in
message <E19df8E-0007v5-00@sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net>:

> This message was created automatically by mail delivery software
> (Exim).
> 
> A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
> recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es)
> failed:
> 
>   save to /var/spool/exim/rejects/embeddedmimeattachement
>     generated by message filter
>     failed to lock mailbox
>     /var/spool/exim/rejects/embeddedmimeattachement (lock file): retry
>     timeout exceeded ipcop-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>     This message has been rejected because it has
>     a potentially executable attachment "Q3a51q.jpg.exe"
>     This form of attachment has been used by
>     recent viruses or other malware.
>     If you meant to send this file then please
>     package it up as a zip file and resend it.
>     If you didn't mean to send this file, and you are
>     using microsoft outlook, you are probably infected.
>     Please stop using outlook, it is inherently insecure
>     and you are generating lots of wasted bandwidth and
>     support headackes by using it, and you are jeopardizing
>     your files and your data
>     Please seriously consider using another mail client
> 
> ------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers.
> ------
> 



-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.

..why _never_ answer off-list: "Q3a51q.jpg.exe" ;-)

[Arnt Karlsen]

Hi,

..I found this in my spam dump.  ;-) 


Return-Path: <tj.miller@man.poznan.pl>

..<snip top Received stanza>

Received: from area51.it ([217.141.202.85]) by fep20-svc.swip.net with 
	SMTP
        id <20030718221737.UPZC9567.fep20-svc.swip.net@area51.it>
        for <arnt@c2i.net>; Sat, 19 Jul 2003 00:17:37 +0200
Received: (qmail 27537 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2003 22:17:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO decibel-q2g3k3v) (192.168.1.66)
  by mail.area51.it with SMTP; 18 Jul 2003 22:17:24 -0000
From:  Tim Miller <tj.miller@man.poznan.pl>
Subject:  INPUT vs. FORWARD when????
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----------GYOBSIU3SEQ760"
Message-Id: <20030718221737.UPZC9567.fep20-svc.swip.net@area51.it>
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 00:17:42 +0200

------------GYOBSIU3SEQ760
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


As a newbie to iptables I have some confusion on the subject of the
chain traversal process that I hope the list can help me clear up.

Let say for a moment I have one machine, 2 interfaces configured as
follows, assume for the moment that the 192 address is my internet
connection.

eth0 -> 192.168.1.1 - Internet Gateway
eth1 -> 10.2.0.1 - Local Lan gateway

T   F : A packet is received on eth1 whose destination address is
10.2.0.1 then I assume

------------GYOBSIU3SEQ760
Content-Type: application/x-msdownload; name="Q3a51q.jpg.exe"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Q3a51q.jpg.exe"

TVqQAAMAAAAEAAAA//8AALgAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAA
AAAA2AAAAA4fug4AtAnNIbgBTM0hVGhpcyBwcm9ncmFtIGNhbm5vdCBiZSBydW4gaW4gRE9
TIG1v
ZGUuDQ0KJAAAAAAAAACPY1NsywI9P8sCPT/LAj0/sB4xP88CPT9IHjM/yQI9PyMdNz/eAj0
/Ix05
P8kCPT+pHS4/wAI9P8sCPD9xAj0/Ix02P9sCPT9SaWNoywI9PwAAAAAAAAAAUEUAAEwBAwA
5bVKy
AAAAAAAAAADgAA4BCwEGAAAgAQAAEAAAAOAGACABCAAA8AYAABAIAAAAQAAAEAAAAAIAAAQ
AAAAA
AAAABAAAAAAAAAAAIAgAABAAAAAAAAACAAAAAAAQAAAQAAAAABAAABAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAA
AAAAA
AAAAEAgAZAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGQRCAAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAA

..<snip 96 kB kiddie snott>

-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.