Test mail

Test mail

[Mailing Server]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 51 bytes --]

Hi, just verifying email, enjoy the attached file.

[-- Attachment #2: wishyou.zip --]
[-- Type: application/x-zip-compressed, Size: 17926 bytes --]

Re: Test mail :: DO NOT FSKING OPEN THE ATTACHMENT

[God]

Incase someone was stupid enough to open the attachment, and run the exe,
DON'T DO IT.


<McAfee>
/Music.exe
        Found the W32/Music@M trojan !!!
</McAfee>


On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, it was written:

> Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
> 	id <S268251AbRG3BAh>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 21:00:37 -0400
> Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
> 	id <S268250AbRG3BA2>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 21:00:28 -0400
> Received: from cx852567-a.ocnsd1.sdca.home.com ([24.5.1.87]:30468 "HELO
> 	localhost") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id <S268249AbRG3BAO>;
> 	Sun, 29 Jul 2001 21:00:14 -0400
> From: "Mailing Server" <>
> To: "Mailing list" <>
> Subject: Test mail
> Date: 	Sun, 29 Jul 2001 17:20:08 -0500
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
> 	boundary="--------"
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.0
> Message-Id: <20010730010022Z268249-720+7682@vger.kernel.org>
> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
> Precedence: bulk
> X-Mailing-List: 	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing
> 
> Hi, just verifying email, enjoy the attached file.
> 

Re: Test mail :: DO NOT FSKING OPEN THE ATTACHMENT

[Michael Rothwell]

On 29 Jul 2001 21:50:22 -0400, God wrote:
> Incase someone was stupid enough to open the attachment, and run the exe,
> DON'T DO IT.

I'm not even sure what Wine settings I should use...

/me runs

Re: Test mail :: DO NOT FSKING OPEN THE ATTACHMENT

[Jim Potter]

I opened it up just fine in my gzip app, saw that it was most likely another
one of those windows viruses, and tossed it out.  Can't run it anyway -- I'm
a Mac / Linux shop.  Sorry about what happened to all those lemmings,
though.  Hehe.

> Incase someone was stupid enough to open the attachment, and run the exe,
> DON'T DO IT.
>
> <McAfee>
> /Music.exe
>         Found the W32/Music@M trojan !!!
> </McAfee>

--
Sincerely,

Jim Potter
45th Parallel Processing
jrp@wvi.com

Re: Test mail

[Anton Altaparmakov]

At 23:20 29/07/2001, Mailing Server wrote:
>Hi, just verifying email, enjoy the attached file.

Would it be possible to have lkml setup to filter out this kind of crap?!?

It had no valid email addresses as From: nor To:...

And if anyone running Windows without an anti virus checker for email 
didn't notice, the zipped attachment had a virus in it...

Cheers,

Anton


-- 
   "Nothing succeeds like success." - Alexandre Dumas
-- 
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS Maintainer / WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/
ICQ: 8561279 / WWW: http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/

Re: Test mail

[Rik van Riel]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> At 23:20 29/07/2001, Mailing Server wrote:
> >Hi, just verifying email, enjoy the attached file.
>
> Would it be possible to have lkml setup to filter out this kind of crap?!?

IIRC lkml already has pretty strict filters.

However, you cannot have your filters prepared for
any random thing. Eventually something will get
through.

It seems that this month's something just got through.

such is life,

Rik
--
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...

http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/

Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)

Re: Test mail

[Paul G. Allen]

My solution to 99.9% of the trojan/virus problems:

I don't run Windows, and I don't enable Java/Javascript for mail, news,
and web sites (unless I trust the site, I MUST view it, and it requires
Java/Javascript).

PGA

-- 
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Network Security
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com

Re: Test mail

[Paul G. Allen]

Well The e-mail looks like it may be a variation on SirCam or Code Red
(I could be wrong). It appears to have its own mailer attached (from
what I saw in the header - I have not opened the attached .zip) and it
came from:

cx852567-a.ocnsd1.sdca.home.com

Oceanside, California, USA (about 30 miles North of me).

If this is someone on this list (I'm not about to search all the headers
of all the mail in my mailbox to find who it is) - and I believe it very
well may be - then it's time to re-install Windows.

(Oh, and I wouldn't use MS Oulook anymore, and be careful with Netscape
mail as well.)

PGA

-- 
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Network Security
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com

Re: Test mail

[Lew Wolfgang]

Hi Paul,

I forwarded the message to a Trend Micro based smtp Viruswall
which reported it as the TROJ_MUSIC.B virus.  Trend reports
it as being a non-destructive, low-risk virus that plays a
tune (taps?) when activated.

Even a low-risk virus can be a pain to exorcise, I hope that
no one here was infected.

Regards,
Lew Wolfgang

On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Paul G. Allen wrote:

> Well The e-mail looks like it may be a variation on SirCam or Code Red
> (I could be wrong). It appears to have its own mailer attached (from
> what I saw in the header - I have not opened the attached .zip) and it
> came from:
>
> cx852567-a.ocnsd1.sdca.home.com
>
> Oceanside, California, USA (about 30 miles North of me).

Re: Test mail

[Paul G. Allen]

Lew Wolfgang wrote:
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> I forwarded the message to a Trend Micro based smtp Viruswall
> which reported it as the TROJ_MUSIC.B virus.  Trend reports
> it as being a non-destructive, low-risk virus that plays a
> tune (taps?) when activated.
> 
> Even a low-risk virus can be a pain to exorcise, I hope that
> no one here was infected.
> 

Music anyone? ;-)


-- 
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Network Security
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com

Re: Test mail

[Dr. Kelsey Hudson]

> On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Paul G. Allen wrote:
>
> > Well The e-mail looks like it may be a variation on SirCam or Code Red
> > (I could be wrong). It appears to have its own mailer attached (from
> > what I saw in the header - I have not opened the attached .zip) and it
> > came from:
> >
> > cx852567-a.ocnsd1.sdca.home.com
> >
> > Oceanside, California, USA (about 30 miles North of me).

About the same distance from me, also. a cable modem user on the @home
network....

 Kelsey Hudson                                           khudson@ctica.com
 Software Engineer
 Compendium Technologies, Inc                               (619) 725-0771
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Test mail

[Chris Crowther]

On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Paul G. Allen wrote:

> Well The e-mail looks like it may be a variation on SirCam or Code Red
> (I could be wrong). It appears to have its own mailer attached (from
> what I saw in the header - I have not opened the attached .zip) and it
> came from:

	It got caught by my AMaViS scan - apparently it's Worm.Music.

	Erm, appologise to everyone if it send the alert to the list - it
sends warning to the message sender as well...I think I might need to do
some modification to how it picks the person to warn.

-- 
Chris "_Shad0w_" Crowther
shad0w@shad0w.org.uk
http://www.shad0w.org.uk/

Re: Test mail

[Alexander V. Bilichenko]

It's not solution (ex. I like Windows as workstation because of too buggy
and inconvenient  X, W2k does not crash at all and have much more convenient
interface. A lot of people use Linux only on servers and connecting to it
using SSH or smth like that), but someone should be moron to run something
like that in zip-file.
Best regards,
Alexander         mailto:dmor@7ka.mipt.ru
------------------------------------------------------
Let's start the war, said Muggy
------------------------------------------------------
From: "Paul G. Allen" <pgallen@randomlogic.com>
To: <unlisted-recipients:>; <no To-header on input>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: Test mail


> My solution to 99.9% of the trojan/virus problems:
>
> I don't run Windows, and I don't enable Java/Javascript for mail, news,
> and web sites (unless I trust the site, I MUST view it, and it requires
> Java/Javascript).
>
> PGA
>
> --
> Paul G. Allen
> UNIX Admin II/Network Security
> Akamai Technologies, Inc.
> www.akamai.com
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

Re: Test mail

[Paul Mundt]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 10:29:45AM +0400, Alexander V. Bilichenko wrote:
> It's not solution (ex. I like Windows as workstation because of too buggy
> and inconvenient  X, W2k does not crash at all and have much more convenient
> interface. A lot of people use Linux only on servers and connecting to it
> using SSH or smth like that), but someone should be moron to run something
> like that in zip-file.

These things are just the internet's way of natural population control. Those
people who execute things blindly of their own accord deserve whatever happens
to them.

While these things are a nuisance, they're hardly that big of a deal. These
kind of things have existed forever, and people have somehow managed to get
by.

If people are that concerned that they might possibly be exploited by it,
they have a number of solutions:

	1) Get a real OS
	2) Get a real Email client
	3) Apply common sense where possible

These 3 easy steps are the quickest way to abolish these kind of things once
and for all.

Regards,

-- 
Paul Mundt <lethal@chaoticdreams.org>

Re: Test mail

[john slee]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 04:07:47AM -0700, Paul Mundt wrote:
> While these things are a nuisance, they're hardly that big of a deal. These
> kind of things have existed forever, and people have somehow managed to get
> by.

they ARE a big deal.  someone, somewhere pays for the traffic.  they
didn't CHOOSE to be flooded with virii/worms.  but their upstream won't
be nice and say "aw you got hit by some email virus i wont bill you for
that traffic..."

your attitude seems similar to that of spammers.  "just press del!"

j.

-- 
"Bobby, jiggle Grandpa's rat so it looks alive, please" -- gary larson

Re: Test mail

[Alan Cox]

> they ARE a big deal.  someone, somewhere pays for the traffic.  they
> didn't CHOOSE to be flooded with virii/worms.  but their upstream won't
> be nice and say "aw you got hit by some email virus i wont bill you for
> that traffic..."

Its more than that. Its the same smug arrogance that is going to get a lot
of people nasty shocks one day

ELM, Pine and Mutt have all at various times had holes that could have been
used to write an exact Unix equivalent of the windows virus. 
<img src="file:/dev/mouse"> hangs some web browser email 4 years after the
bug was reported and so on...


Alan

Re: Test mail

[Paul Mundt]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 12:46:18PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Its more than that. Its the same smug arrogance that is going to get a lot
> of people nasty shocks one day
> 
> ELM, Pine and Mutt have all at various times had holes that could have been
> used to write an exact Unix equivalent of the windows virus. 
> <img src="file:/dev/mouse"> hangs some web browser email 4 years after the
> bug was reported and so on...
> 
This all goes back to opening things blindly, and also ties in the issue of
HTML aware email clients.

Mail clients should simply be dealing with plain text. As soon as things like
HTML support are introduced into the client, you have the same sort of
problems that you do with easily exploitable web browsers.

These things are only an issue when your mail client tries to do things for
you instead of allowing you to do them yourself. HTML emails can simply be
fed through something like a lynx -dump in order to capture their plaintext
output.

Keep HTML where it belongs, on webpages, not mail. If someone wants to send
you an image, they can do so through an attachment.

Regards,

-- 
Paul Mundt <lethal@chaoticdreams.org>

Re: Test mail

[Alan Cox]

> > ELM, Pine and Mutt have all at various times had holes that could have been
> > used to write an exact Unix equivalent of the windows virus. 
> > <img src="file:/dev/mouse"> hangs some web browser email 4 years after the
> > bug was reported and so on...
> > 
> This all goes back to opening things blindly, and also ties in the issue of
> HTML aware email clients.

Most exploits are header parsing flaws, HTML email is irrelevant to this
discussion.

> Mail clients should simply be dealing with plain text. As soon as things like
> HTML support are introduced into the client, you have the same sort of
> problems that you do with easily exploitable web browsers.

No. Most of them are header parsing flaws, they worked with plain text
email just fine. In fact HTML parsing vulnerabilities (other than privacy
violations) are pretty rare.

Alan

Re: Test mail

[Paul Mundt]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 01:15:21PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > ELM, Pine and Mutt have all at various times had holes that could have been
> > > used to write an exact Unix equivalent of the windows virus. 
> > > <img src="file:/dev/mouse"> hangs some web browser email 4 years after the
> > > bug was reported and so on...
> > > 
> > This all goes back to opening things blindly, and also ties in the issue of
> > HTML aware email clients.
> 
> Most exploits are header parsing flaws, HTML email is irrelevant to this
> discussion.
> 
Parsing an <img> tag certainly seems to make HTML email relevant...

> > Mail clients should simply be dealing with plain text. As soon as things like
> > HTML support are introduced into the client, you have the same sort of
> > problems that you do with easily exploitable web browsers.
> 
> No. Most of them are header parsing flaws, they worked with plain text
> email just fine. In fact HTML parsing vulnerabilities (other than privacy
> violations) are pretty rare.
> 
There are far fewer header parsing exploits floating around then there are
users executing things of an unknown origin and unknowingly sending copies of
said thing to everyone in their address book.

While header parsing exploits are indeed an issue, they hardly make up the
bulk of these sort of exploits.

Things like Elm, Pine, and Mutt can be as exploitable as anything else as far
as header parsing issues are concerned. They still account for far less
of the problems than things like Outlook do.

Regards,

-- 
Paul Mundt <lethal@chaoticdreams.org>

Re: Test mail

[Alan Cox]

> Things like Elm, Pine, and Mutt can be as exploitable as anything else as far
> as header parsing issues are concerned. They still account for far less
> of the problems than things like Outlook do.

Only because the relative %age of the userbase is tiny. 

There have actually been some very serious pine based attacks using header
parsing bugs to steal password files. 

Re: Test mail

[Riley Williams]

Hi Rik.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:

 > On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:

 >> At 23:20 29/07/2001, Mailing Server wrote:

 >>>Hi, just verifying email, enjoy the attached file.

 >> Would it be possible to have lkml setup to filter out this kind of
 >> crap?!?

 > IIRC lkml already has pretty strict filters.
 >
 > However, you cannot have your filters prepared for
 > any random thing. Eventually something will get
 > through.
 >
 > It seems that this month's something just got through.

Surely it should be simple to check that each piece of mail has a from
address in it, and either kill any that doesn't, or at least plug in
the envelope from address in its place?

Best wishes from Riley.

Re: Test mail

[christophe barbé]

Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail produced by
Outlook?
It sounds to me the equivalent of RBL & co.
RBL filter out mail from open relay used to spam us.
NoOutlook filter out mail from poor software/OS used to propagate viruses.

I guess that 100% of incomming viruses in lkml come from a Outlook mailer.
And for the last two ones I'm sure.

Christophe

Le lun, 30 jui 2001 09:28:53, Riley Williams a écrit :
> Hi Rik.
> 
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> 
>  > On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> 
>  >> At 23:20 29/07/2001, Mailing Server wrote:
> 
>  >>>Hi, just verifying email, enjoy the attached file.
> 
>  >> Would it be possible to have lkml setup to filter out this kind of
>  >> crap?!?
> 
>  > IIRC lkml already has pretty strict filters.
>  >
>  > However, you cannot have your filters prepared for
>  > any random thing. Eventually something will get
>  > through.
>  >
>  > It seems that this month's something just got through.
> 
> Surely it should be simple to check that each piece of mail has a from
> address in it, and either kill any that doesn't, or at least plug in
> the envelope from address in its place?
> 
> Best wishes from Riley.
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 
-- 
Christophe Barbé
Software Engineer - christophe.barbe@lineo.fr
Lineo France - Lineo High Availability Group
42-46, rue Médéric - 92110 Clichy - France
phone (33).1.41.40.02.12 - fax (33).1.41.40.02.01
http://www.lineo.com

Re: Test mail

[Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, christophe barbé wrote:

> Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail produced by
> Outlook?
> It sounds to me the equivalent of RBL & co.
> RBL filter out mail from open relay used to spam us.
> NoOutlook filter out mail from poor software/OS used to propagate viruses.
>
> I guess that 100% of incomming viruses in lkml come from a Outlook mailer.
> And for the last two ones I'm sure.
>
> Christophe

Um, that's just a little (LITTLE?!?) draconian/elitist. How about putting in a
handler that renames EXEs attachments and EXEs in compressed files to
something a little
less executable?

Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of Outlook or OE, but you can't just step on
people who use them.

-- 
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams  <ignacio@openservices.net>

Re: Test mail

[Albert D. Cahalan]

Ignacio Vazquez-Ab writes:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, christophe barbé wrote:

>> Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail produced by
>> Outlook?
>> It sounds to me the equivalent of RBL & co.
>> RBL filter out mail from open relay used to spam us.
>> NoOutlook filter out mail from poor software/OS used to propagate viruses.
>>
>> I guess that 100% of incomming viruses in lkml come from a Outlook mailer.
>> And for the last two ones I'm sure.
>>
>> Christophe
>
> Um, that's just a little (LITTLE?!?) draconian/elitist. How about
> putting in a handler that renames EXEs attachments and EXEs in
> compressed files to something a little less executable?
>
> Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of Outlook or OE, but you
> can't just step on people who use them.

This is a lot less draconian/elitist than banning ISPs. People
seldom have a choice between multiple ISPs that offer affordable
high-speed connections. Consider yourself lucky if both DSL and
cable modem service are available and affordable in your area.

Banning Outlook isn't so bad. Assuming you are stuck with Windows,
you still have many choices. Netscape/Mozilla and Eudora would be
the obvious choices. I think you can get pine. Emacs has been
ported to Windows, so you have the rmail/gnus stuff. Surely you
can tolerate at least one of these many choices.

Re: Test mail

[Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:

> Banning Outlook isn't so bad. Assuming you are stuck with Windows,
> you still have many choices. Netscape/Mozilla and Eudora would be
> the obvious choices. I think you can get pine. Emacs has been
> ported to Windows, so you have the rmail/gnus stuff. Surely you
> can tolerate at least one of these many choices.

The problem is that in plenty of large companies not only are you stuck with
Windows, but you're also stuck with either Outlook or Notes because of
corporate decisions (i.e., Exchange or Domino). Trust me; been there, done
that.

-- 
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams  <ignacio@openservices.net>

Re: Test mail

[Justin Guyett]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:

> The problem is that in plenty of large companies not only are you stuck with
> Windows, but you're also stuck with either Outlook or Notes because of
> corporate decisions (i.e., Exchange or Domino). Trust me; been there, done
> that.

Hmm... linux developers at large corporations are stuck with [only]
windows?  How do they get anything done?  Just because you're stuck with
outlook for scheduling or whatever doesn't mean you can't send to mailing
lists from another mailer, another OS, or another country.


justin

Re: Test mail

[Horst von Brand]

Justin Guyett <justin@soze.net> said:

[...]

> Hmm... linux developers at large corporations are stuck with [only]
> windows?

What about would-be Linux hackers, or people running Linux (il)legally on
some machines inside a WinXX shop? Want to leave them out for good? Not
everybody on lkml is a hard-core kernel hacker...

Now, banning some attachment types I could understand...
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                Usuario #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  +56 32 797513

Re: Test mail

[Ragnar Hojland Espinosa]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 05:14:30PM -0400, Horst von Brand wrote:
> Justin Guyett <justin@soze.net> said:

How was it.. Be conservative in what you send, and liberal in what you
accept? 

It took Rik (IIRC) to say he was leaving l-k to get rid of that stupid DUL
abusing thing that didn't allow him (and others, including me!) to post..
please lets not get there again. 

As Horst says, not everyone is a hard-core hacker.. now imagine one or two
of them actually had to post with, say outlook.  Would you still want to
filter it?  I'm sure not.
-- 
____/|  Ragnar Højland      Freedom - Linux - OpenGL |    Brainbench MVP
\ o.O|  PGP94C4B2F0D27DE025BE2302C104B78C56 B72F0822 | for Unix Programming
 =(_)=  "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer for  | (www.brainbench.com)
   U     chaos and madness await thee at its end."

Re: Test mail

[Colonel]

In clouddancer.list.kernel, you wrote:
>
>On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
>
>> The problem is that in plenty of large companies not only are you stuck with
>> Windows, but you're also stuck with either Outlook or Notes because of
>> corporate decisions (i.e., Exchange or Domino). Trust me; been there, done
>> that.
>
>Hmm... linux developers at large corporations are stuck with [only]
>windows?  How do they get anything done?  Just because you're stuck with
>outlook for scheduling or whatever doesn't mean you can't send to mailing
>lists from another mailer, another OS, or another country.

I've dealt with "you've gotta run" before.  I had the required
hardware & software running over in the corner, with shared disk space
or remote access from the linux box on the desktop.  It wasn't easy,
but I simply stuck to my insistance that I _needed_ this (only one
example required) and that I was meeting the company's requirements.
Nowdays, that situation is on my checklist to determine if I want to
work there.

The really funny thing about the initial email is the amount of
interest in the followups and their meanderings.


-- 
Windows 2001: "I'm sorry Dave ...  I'm afraid I can't do that."

Re: Test mail

[Jim Potter]

One problem with the idea of banning "MS virus express" is that most of the
lemmings stuck with MS's windows are also stuck with the MS's mail app.  If they
had the wherewithall (personal, political, whatever) to switch to a different
mail app, they'de probably know how & be able to switch the whole thing to a
better environment.


> >> Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail produced by
> >> Outlook?
> >> It sounds to me the equivalent of RBL & co.
> >> RBL filter out mail from open relay used to spam us.
> >> NoOutlook filter out mail from poor software/OS used to propagate viruses.
> >>
> >> I guess that 100% of incomming viruses in lkml come from a Outlook mailer.
> >> And for the last two ones I'm sure.
> >>
> >> Christophe
> >
> > Um, that's just a little (LITTLE?!?) draconian/elitist. How about
> > putting in a handler that renames EXEs attachments and EXEs in
> > compressed files to something a little less executable?
> >
> > Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of Outlook or OE, but you
> > can't just step on people who use them.
>
> This is a lot less draconian/elitist than banning ISPs. People
> seldom have a choice between multiple ISPs that offer affordable
> high-speed connections. Consider yourself lucky if both DSL and
> cable modem service are available and affordable in your area.
>
> Banning Outlook isn't so bad. Assuming you are stuck with Windows,
> you still have many choices. Netscape/Mozilla and Eudora would be
> the obvious choices. I think you can get pine. Emacs has been
> ported to Windows, so you have the rmail/gnus stuff. Surely you
> can tolerate at least one of these many choices.

--
Sincerely,

Jim Potter
45th Parallel Processing
jrp@wvi.com

Re: Test mail

[Mike Galbraith]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:

> Ignacio Vazquez-Ab writes:
> > On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, christophe barbé wrote:
>
> >> Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail produced by
> >> Outlook?
> >> It sounds to me the equivalent of RBL & co.
> >> RBL filter out mail from open relay used to spam us.
> >> NoOutlook filter out mail from poor software/OS used to propagate viruses.
> >>
> >> I guess that 100% of incomming viruses in lkml come from a Outlook mailer.
> >> And for the last two ones I'm sure.
> >>
> >> Christophe
> >
> > Um, that's just a little (LITTLE?!?) draconian/elitist. How about
> > putting in a handler that renames EXEs attachments and EXEs in
> > compressed files to something a little less executable?
> >
> > Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of Outlook or OE, but you
> > can't just step on people who use them.
>
> This is a lot less draconian/elitist than banning ISPs. People
> seldom have a choice between multiple ISPs that offer affordable
> high-speed connections. Consider yourself lucky if both DSL and
> cable modem service are available and affordable in your area.
>
> Banning Outlook isn't so bad. Assuming you are stuck with Windows,
> you still have many choices. Netscape/Mozilla and Eudora would be
> the obvious choices. I think you can get pine. Emacs has been
> ported to Windows, so you have the rmail/gnus stuff. Surely you
> can tolerate at least one of these many choices.

Why bother?  The _occasional_ spam slips through the filters.  I don't
see any real difference if some weenie slips me a plain spam or a spam
with an impotent attachment I'm not going to look at anyway.  It all
costs me the same.. one 'D'+download cost.

	-Mike

Re: Test mail

[Dr. Kelsey Hudson]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:

> Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of Outlook or OE, but you can't just step on
> people who use them.

Sure you can. Microsoft has done that for decades. Look where it got them!

-- 
 Kelsey Hudson                                           khudson@ctica.com
 Software Engineer
 Compendium Technologies, Inc                               (619) 725-0771
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Test mail

[szonyi calin]

--- "Dr. Kelsey Hudson"
<kernel@blackhole.compendium-tech.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> 
> > Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of Outlook or OE,
> but you can't just step on
> > people who use them.
> 
> Sure you can. Microsoft has done that for decades.
> Look where it got them!
> 

And still does.
And people are too stupid to enjoy this.
Just watch the news on CNN: it's internet the one
which is not secure not Micro$oft's operating sistems.
:-)

> -- 
>  Kelsey Hudson                                      
>     khudson@ctica.com
>  Software Engineer
>  Compendium Technologies, Inc                       
>        (619) 725-0771
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/

Re: Test mail

[Jakob Østergaard]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 06:17:31PM +0200, christophe barbé wrote:
> Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail produced by
> Outlook?

http://unthought.net/msworms.html

> It sounds to me the equivalent of RBL & co.
> RBL filter out mail from open relay used to spam us.
> NoOutlook filter out mail from poor software/OS used to propagate viruses.

Any agent could be vulnerable.

Discrimination is hardly a viable solution.

> 
> I guess that 100% of incomming viruses in lkml come from a Outlook mailer.
> And for the last two ones I'm sure.


Life sucks get a helmet.

-- 
................................................................
:   jakob@unthought.net   : And I see the elder races,         :
:.........................: putrid forms of man                :
:   Jakob Østergaard      : See him rise and claim the earth,  :
:        OZ9ABN           : his downfall is at hand.           :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:

Re: Test mail

[Matti Aarnio]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 06:17:31PM +0200, christophe barbé wrote:
> Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail produced by Outlook?

   No.   If you look carefully, you would be surprised at how many are
   using OutlookSExpress to handle their email.

   Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are seeing
   the distilled evil.

   It is analogous on how I am seeing the UNRELIABILITY of people's email
   systems.   I see only failure cases, never succesfull deliveries!


   If you want to discuss on how to put stricter filters of things
   into VGER's Majordomo, you can do that with <postmaster@vger.kernel.org>

   Doing it at lists is waste of time, and misses *MY* attention!


/Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>
		Co-postmaster of vger.kernel.org

Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Riley Williams]

Hi Matti.

First, let's have a subject that reflects the content...

 >> Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail
 >> produced by Outlook?

 > No. If you look carefully, you would be surprised at how many
 > are using OutlookSExpress to handle their email.

 > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
 > seeing the distilled evil.

Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?

Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?

 > It is analogous on how I am seeing the UNRELIABILITY of people's
 > email systems. I see only failure cases, never succesfull
 > deliveries!

Same here...

 > If you want to discuss on how to put stricter filters of things
 > into VGER's Majordomo, you can do that with
 > <postmaster@vger.kernel.org>

 > Doing it at lists is waste of time, and misses *MY* attention!

Hopefully, this caught your attention...

Best wishes from Riley.

OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Craig Milo Rogers]

>Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
>attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?

	Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.

					Craig Milo Rogers

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[William Scott Lockwood III]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 988 bytes --]

Strip rather than bounce.  Some of us know how to configure our mail
clients to send messages in plain text...

Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Milo Rogers" <rogers@ISI.EDU>
To: "Riley Williams" <rhw@MemAlpha.CX>
Cc: "Matti Aarnio" <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>; "christophe barbé"
<christophe.barbe@lineo.fr>; "Linux Kernel"
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 1:12 PM
Subject: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists


| >Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
| >attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
|
| Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
| or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.
|
| Craig Milo Rogers
| -
| To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-kernel" in
| the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
| More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Paul G. Allen]

Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> 
> >Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
> >attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
> 
>         Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.
> 

This is exactly what is done with the KPLUG mailing lists (Kernel-Panic Linux User Group - www.kernel-panic.org). Attachments are not allowed by the mail server
and anyone sending HTML/RTF format mail gets an earful (eyeful?) from other list members.

Of course this would not stop Subseven propagation (generally, Subseven is attached to a web site and an e-mail is sent to you with a link to that site.
Clicking on the link, loading the site, infects your Windows box), but then this is a case where simple education is the way to stop propagation.

PGA

-- 
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Programmer
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com
Work: (858)909-3630
Cell: (858)395-5043

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Riley Williams]

Hi Craig.

 >> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
 >> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?

 > Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments, or
 > bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.

Two problems with that:

 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.

 2. The maintainer of the XXX driver just uploaded a large patch that
    fixes a major bug in their driver to the mailing list, and zip'd
    it up to reduce its size. You just bounced it...

Basically, that particular fix causes pain and gives no gain, so as
far as I'm concerned, it's a non-starter...

Best wishes from Riley.

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Thomas Duffy]

On 31 Jul 2001 23:17:13 +0100, Riley Williams wrote:

>  1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.

huh?  how do you write an ASCII text virus.  if you can do that, I will
give you a cookie.

example, maybe:

email receiver, please forward this message to everyone you know and
then execute as root "rm -rf /"

(if you refer to vbs text attachments, then that is a different story)

>  2. The maintainer of the XXX driver just uploaded a large patch that
>     fixes a major bug in their driver to the mailing list, and zip'd
>     it up to reduce its size. You just bounced it...

said driver writer should not be uploading huge patches to the mailing
list anyways and instead should have a URL that points to the website or
ftp site with the patch on it.  if it is zipped already, then sending in
email defeats the purpose since I cannot view it in my email reader to
see if it makes sense. I have to be proactive about viewing it, so it
might as well be on a website or ftp site.

-tduffy

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Craig Milo Rogers]

> > Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments, or
> > bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.
>
>Two problems with that:
>
> 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.

	I'm not aware of the TEXT/PLAIN viruses (ignoring jokes, er,
social comments, about the GPL).  Could you point me to a sample?

> 2. The maintainer of the XXX driver just uploaded a large patch that
>    fixes a major bug in their driver to the mailing list, and zip'd
>    it up to reduce its size. You just bounced it...

	I recall from past discussions that there's considerable
sentiment on l-k that zip'd patches are undesirable.  If the patch is
inconveniently large, it can be split into several messages, or placed
on an FTP server.  Inconvenient for the developer, maybe, but better
for the list as a whole.

	Separately, I think we've spent enough time with the off-topic
topic.  Perhaps we can move the discussion offline?

					Craig Milo Rogers

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Riley Williams]

Hi Craig.

 >>> Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments, or
 >>> bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.

 >> Two problems with that:
 >>
 >> 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal with them.

 > I'm not aware of the TEXT/PLAIN viruses (ignoring jokes, er,
 > social comments, about the GPL). Could you point me to a sample?

Are you limiting "text attachments" to TEXT/PLAIN ??? If so, you just
killed a large number of very useful attachments. Off the top of my
head...

 1. Most patches that are attached rather than inline arrive here
    as TEXT/DIFF so you've just killed a lot of very important
    attachments.

 2. Some of Linus Torvalds' emails come with a TEXT/SIGNATURE
    attachment, so you've just prevented him posting from the
    computer that does that.

 3. One of the assignments at University was to email a specific
    MS-Word document (with an auto-starting macro in it) through a
    mailer that was specifically set to strip any attachments of the
    relevant mime types. In a class of 43 students, only two failed
    that assignment, and between the 41 who succeeded, no less than
    SEVEN different ways to do so were used, ALL of which used TEXT/
    mime types for the enclosure - and FIVE of those were new to the
    lecturer as well. The said lecturer also stated that there were
    a further NINE ways to do so that none of us had found, but did
    not go into detail.

Once you allow TEXT/* to pass, you discover just how many virii will
get straight past your filter without any problems at all. Basically,
you get nowhere doing that...

 >> 2. The maintainer of the XXX driver just uploaded a large patch that
 >>    fixes a major bug in their driver to the mailing list, and zip'd
 >>    it up to reduce its size. You just bounced it...

 > I recall from past discussions that there's considerable
 > sentiment on l-k that zip'd patches are undesirable. If the
 > patch is inconveniently large, it can be split into several
 > messages, or placed on an FTP server.  Inconvenient for the
 > developer, maybe, but better for the list as a whole.

Personally, my own stance on attachments (zip or otherwise) is that
they should be below the limit at which my mailhost rejects them. On
at least one mailhost I know, emails over 25k are killed without
notice. My own mailhost kills any over 1,536k so that isn't a problem
for me, but others have much smaller limits.

 > Separately, I think we've spent enough time with the off-topic
 > topic. Perhaps we can move the discussion offline?

Other than your comments, it already is offline...

Best wishes from Riley.

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Alan Cox]

> >Two problems with that:
> > 1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.
> 
> 	I'm not aware of the TEXT/PLAIN viruses (ignoring jokes, er,
> social comments, about the GPL).  Could you point me to a sample?

Mime header based ones: there have been several
Body text based ones: I know of one that exploited the escape vulnerability
in X11R5 xterm - it really was a 'README' virus.

Alan

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Alan Shutko]

Thomas Duffy <Thomas.Duffy.99@alumni.brown.edu> writes:

> On 31 Jul 2001 23:17:13 +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
> 
>>  1. Some virii are text attachments. Your fix doesn't deal wioth them.
> 
> huh?  how do you write an ASCII text virus.  if you can do that, I will
> give you a cookie.

Easy... since most Windows mailers ignore the mime-type, just throw
your normal virus in a text/plain type.

-- 
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> - In a variety of flavors!
If anything can go wrong, it will.

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Dr. Kelsey Hudson]

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:

> 	Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.

That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!

 Kelsey Hudson                                           khudson@ctica.com
 Software Engineer
 Compendium Technologies, Inc                               (619) 725-0771
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Alexander Viro]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> 
> > 	Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> > or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.
> 
> That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
> that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!

Don't use attachments on l-k. If patch is small - include it in the body.
If it isn't - post URL.

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[J . A . Magallon]

On 20010801 Alexander Viro wrote:
>
>
>On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
>> 
>> > 	Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
>> > or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.
>> 
>> That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
>> that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
>
>Don't use attachments on l-k. If patch is small - include it in the body.
>If it isn't - post URL.
>

That is the always repeated answer. I could get a web page at some box at the
University, but there are many people that have not a permanent address. Going
to the mess of using a ISP-provided web page is a pain. Instead of bzip your
patch and send it to the list you have to go through bizarre http interfaces
to manage your web page (tell me about a ISP that lets you telnet/ssh/ftp to your
account).

I do not see why a bzipped patch is so bad. The only person I was aware he won't 
read anything but plain text is Linus (and now some on this thread look with
the same feeling).

-- 
J.A. Magallon                           #  Let the source be with you...        
mailto:jamagallon@able.es
Mandrake Linux release 8.1 (Cooker) for i586
Linux werewolf 2.4.7-ac3 #1 SMP Mon Jul 30 16:39:36 CEST 2001 i686

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Paul G. Allen]

"J . A . Magallon" wrote:
> 

[SNIP]
> 
> That is the always repeated answer. I could get a web page at some box at the
> University, but there are many people that have not a permanent address. Going
> to the mess of using a ISP-provided web page is a pain. Instead of bzip your
> patch and send it to the list you have to go through bizarre http interfaces
> to manage your web page (tell me about a ISP that lets you telnet/ssh/ftp to your
> account).
> 
> I do not see why a bzipped patch is so bad. The only person I was aware he won't
> read anything but plain text is Linus (and now some on this thread look with
> the same feeling).
> 

There are a few reasons why zipped attachments, large attachments, and
even large text-only patches are bad on a mailing list such as this:

1. Not everyone uses a mail client that will support the various
attachment encodings and therefore can not get the attachment without
jumping through hoops. Why subject them to this?

2. Some mail clients pervert the standard attachment formats, such as
Outlook Express, making them undecipherable by anyone using anything
other than that very same client. Again, why subject people to that?

3. Many, many people PAY PER BYTE for their Internet connection. Adding
a large attachment, or sending a large text patch file, costs them
money. Many times they do not want it anyway and you are costing them
money by forcing them to D/L it.

4. Not everyone has a high speed connection and with the volume that a
list like this creates, it is a LARGE burden on them to wait, and wait,
and wait, for the few messages they want, and/or need, to see.

So, as with other large projects I've worked on (though none quite this
large) involving a mailing list, the best solution is to a) strip
attachments atthe mailing list server and b) provide a repository for
people to D/L patches, new kernels, etc. for public access.

PGA

-- 
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Network Security
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Miles Lane]

On 01 Aug 2001 22:38:19 -0700, Paul G. Allen wrote:
> "J . A . Magallon" wrote:
> > 
> 
> [SNIP]
> > 
> > That is the always repeated answer. I could get a web page at some box at the
> > University, but there are many people that have not a permanent address. Going
> > to the mess of using a ISP-provided web page is a pain. Instead of bzip your
> > patch and send it to the list you have to go through bizarre http interfaces
> > to manage your web page (tell me about a ISP that lets you telnet/ssh/ftp to your
> > account).
> > 
> > I do not see why a bzipped patch is so bad. The only person I was aware he won't
> > read anything but plain text is Linus (and now some on this thread look with
> > the same feeling).
> > 
> 
> There are a few reasons why zipped attachments, large attachments, and
> even large text-only patches are bad on a mailing list such as this:
> 
> 1. Not everyone uses a mail client that will support the various
> attachment encodings and therefore can not get the attachment without
> jumping through hoops. Why subject them to this?

<snip>

One interface that provides an easy mechanism for posting attachments
is Bugzilla.  See http://bugzilla.gnome.org.  If you open a bug report,
you can add file attachments after initially creating the bug.
Something similar might work very well for the LKML needs.
All that is really required is a web server, some Bugzilla-like
method of pointing to a file and having that get posted to the
web server.  Then, a unique link to the posted file can be returned
that the user can then send along to LKML.

	Miles

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[john slee]

[cc list trimmed]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 11:57:24PM +0200, J . A . Magallon wrote:
> patch and send it to the list you have to go through bizarre http interfaces

i assume by "bizarre http interfaces" you mean webdav as used by modern
msie (on windows at least) and many many other applications?  it's
hardly bizarre.  http://www.webdav.org.  people i've set it up for
(mostly mac users with the Goliath client) preferred it to ftp.

j.

-- 
"Bobby, jiggle Grandpa's rat so it looks alive, please" -- gary larson

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Alan Cox]

> On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> > > 	Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> > > or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.
> > 
> > That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
> > that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
> 
> Don't use attachments on l-k. If patch is small - include it in the body.
> If it isn't - post URL.

Nice theory but netscape, mozilla, and most versions of pine tend to make
a mess of patch files sent plain

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Justin Guyett]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Dr. Kelsey Hudson wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> > 	Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> > or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.

> That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
> that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!

and the response to that argument was that such patches are just as hard
or harder to turn into readable/usable form when included on the list as
when posted on an ftp/web site, so it's better to spare people's mailboxes
from huge attachments and just provide a url to the patch.


justin

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Paul G. Allen]

"Dr. Kelsey Hudson" wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> 
> >       Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
> > or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.
> 
> That has the rather stupid effect of also killing gzip/bzip2ed patches
> that come to the list. Survey says: BZZZZZT!
> 

IMHEO, they should be placed in a repository, not sent to the list. But then, who am I to say? :)

PGA

-- 
Paul G. Allen
UNIX Admin II/Programmer
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
www.akamai.com
Work: (858)909-3630
Cell: (858)395-5043

Re: OT: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Dick Streefland]

Craig Milo Rogers <rogers@ISI.EDU> wrote:
| 	Better than that, simply strip all non-text MIME attachments,
| or bounce the messages containing them.  End of story.

.... and don't forget to check for lines starting with "begin  ":

  http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q265/2/30.ASP

-- 
Dick Streefland                      ////                      Altium BV
dick.streefland@altium.nl           (@ @)          http://www.altium.com
--------------------------------oOO--(_)--OOo---------------------------
.

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Kent Borg]

I always thought it was bad form to send any sort of
enclosure/attachment to a mailing list.

I guess in this MIME-era too many mail clients too easily send the
message itself as an attachment.

How much does this list need real attachments?  Might the list server
strip out all attachments?--and if a message has only attachments,
maybe try to find the one that is the body, break out it, and re-send
it as a boring 822 body with none of the doo-dads likely to catch the
attention of Outlook and other clever mail clients.

If Outlook is too clever by half, sending only non-clever ASCII
content is tempting.


-kb, the Kent who has been lurking with mutt.

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[William Scott Lockwood III]

|  > No. If you look carefully, you would be surprised at how many
|  > are using OutlookSExpress to handle their email.
|  > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
|  > seeing the distilled evil.

Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed.  People
should be responsible to update their mail clients.  People using
Windows (like me) should also be responsible to maintain current virus
software themselves, rather than leaving that job to the mail server,
which seems like an unfair burden on the mail server to me.  I
personally use McAfee, as it will auto update itself periodically if you
tell it to.  Using OE as patched, and McAfee, Virii like the one that
just hit are not a problem - they are caught and killed before they can
execute...  I got hit once (and if you search through the archives,
you'll find a message from me about it - one that I caught holy hell
from many of you for, but anyway) and learned from that incident to
secure my system.  It has not happened since, and won't if I am careful.

The user has the responsibility to be careful, I think.  Not the list
server.

| Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
| attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?

Yes.

| Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?

Yes.

|  > It is analogous on how I am seeing the UNRELIABILITY of people's
|  > email systems. I see only failure cases, never succesfull
|  > deliveries!
| Same here...

No, you both miss the point.  Some PEOPLE are ignorant or unreliable,
the email system performs exactly as instructed...  No matter if it runs
on Linux, or *BSD, or Mickey$oft.

Regards,
Scott

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Ian Stirling]

> 
> |  > No. If you look carefully, you would be surprised at how many
> |  > are using OutlookSExpress to handle their email.
> |  > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
> |  > seeing the distilled evil.

> Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed.  People
> should be responsible to update their mail clients.  People using
> Windows (like me) should also be responsible to maintain current virus
> software themselves, rather than leaving that job to the mail server,
> which seems like an unfair burden on the mail server to me.  

Not everyone has control of the system they can post from.
Some IS departments are poor at keeping systems secure, but still
won't let users touch them.

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[William Scott Lockwood III]

Totally irrelevant.  As long as the other people those messages get sent
to have their act together, the problem dies there.  If not, then the
morons responsible for maintaining the clients and mailservers that will
still allow this to happen get taught a lesson, don't they?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Stirling" <root@mauve.demon.co.uk>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists


| >
| > |  > No. If you look carefully, you would be surprised at how many
| > |  > are using OutlookSExpress to handle their email.
| > |  > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
| > |  > seeing the distilled evil.
|
| > Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed.  People
| > should be responsible to update their mail clients.  People using
| > Windows (like me) should also be responsible to maintain current
virus
| > software themselves, rather than leaving that job to the mail
server,
| > which seems like an unfair burden on the mail server to me.
|
| Not everyone has control of the system they can post from.
| Some IS departments are poor at keeping systems secure, but still
| won't let users touch them.
|
| -
| To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-kernel" in
| the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
| More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Alan Olsen]

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Ian Stirling wrote:

> Not everyone has control of the system they can post from.
> Some IS departments are poor at keeping systems secure, but still
> won't let users touch them.

Or have been told by management that they are required to use buggy e-mail
clients because "it is company policy".

They tried to get me to use Exchange at the last company I worked for.  I
laughed and then moved all my mail to the Linux box under my desk.  I was
one of the few people in the company that had a stable mail account.

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
 "All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Riley Williams]

Hi William.

 > Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed.
 > People should be responsible to update their mail clients.
 > People using Windows (like me) should also be responsible to
 > maintain current virus software themselves, rather than leaving
 > that job to the mail server, which seems like an unfair burden
 > on the mail server to me.

Depends how you view it - I'd much rather host my mailing lists on a
server that I knew scans for virii and deals with any it finds than
one that doesn't.

 > I personally use McAfee, as it will auto update itself
 > periodically if you tell it to. Using OE as patched, and McAfee,
 > Virii like the one that just hit are not a problem - they are
 > caught and killed before they can execute...

McAfee isn't a guarantee, no more than any other virii scanner is. I
used to use McAfee, and had it in auto-update mode. I still got hit by
FOURTEEN virii within half an hour of it updating itself!

 > I got hit once (and if you search through the archives, you'll
 > find a message from me about it - one that I caught holy hell
 > from many of you for, but anyway) and learned from that incident
 > to secure my system. It has not happened since, and won't if I
 > am careful.

Even if you're careful, you can still get hit, so don't rest on your
laurels...

 > The user has the responsibility to be careful, I think. Not the
 > list server.

My own viewpoint is somewhat less blase than yours - the more virii
scanners between the originator and me, the lower the likelihood of my
systems getting a virii.

 >> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
 >> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?

 > Yes.

 >> Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?

 > Yes.

Perhaps you'd care to give details, since you're so blase about it...

 >>> It is analogous on how I am seeing the UNRELIABILITY of people's
 >>> email systems. I see only failure cases, never succesfull
 >>> deliveries!

 >> Same here...

 > No, you both miss the point.

Oh?

 > Some PEOPLE are ignorant or unreliable...

Whether people are ignorant or unreliable has about as much to do with
whether their computers can catch virii as with whether they can. The
only people likely to claim otherwise are virii writers, IMHO.

 > The email system performs exactly as instructed, no matter if it
 > runs on Linux, or *BSD, or Mickey$oft.

The basic point of this duscussion is that the email system's
instructions are flawed and need changing.

Best wishes from Riley.

[OT] Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[William Scott Lockwood III]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3940 bytes --]

Hello Riley!

As I said in another post on the list,

"http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/naicommon/buy-try/try/products-evals.asp

Go there, select your language and LINUX, and you will get a survey to
fill out that then lets you test drive their stuff for linux."

I don't feel that I am particularly blasé, but I will concede that you
have several good points.  My main point was that people seem to be more
interested in the server doing the scanning for them rather than taking
responsibility for their own (lack of) security.  Your view point is
just as valid.

And I don't think your experience with McAfee as reported is typical at
all.  If it was, I'd still be having problems, and NAI would be out of
business.  How long ago was this?  What version of the product?   What
OS?  How did you update?  What 14 Virii were you hit with?  Did you
contact McAfee for support?  I'd be very interested to get more details
about this.

Regards,
Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "Riley Williams" <rhw@MemAlpha.CX>
To: "William Scott Lockwood III" <thatlinuxguy@hotmail.com>
Cc: "Matti Aarnio" <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>; "Linux Kernel"
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists


| Hi William.
|
|  > Of course, non of the common "holes" in OE are left unfixed.
|  > People should be responsible to update their mail clients.
|  > People using Windows (like me) should also be responsible to
|  > maintain current virus software themselves, rather than leaving
|  > that job to the mail server, which seems like an unfair burden
|  > on the mail server to me.
|
| Depends how you view it - I'd much rather host my mailing lists on a
| server that I knew scans for virii and deals with any it finds than
| one that doesn't.
|
|  > I personally use McAfee, as it will auto update itself
|  > periodically if you tell it to. Using OE as patched, and McAfee,
|  > Virii like the one that just hit are not a problem - they are
|  > caught and killed before they can execute...
|
| McAfee isn't a guarantee, no more than any other virii scanner is. I
| used to use McAfee, and had it in auto-update mode. I still got hit by
| FOURTEEN virii within half an hour of it updating itself!
|
|  > I got hit once (and if you search through the archives, you'll
|  > find a message from me about it - one that I caught holy hell
|  > from many of you for, but anyway) and learned from that incident
|  > to secure my system. It has not happened since, and won't if I
|  > am careful.
|
| Even if you're careful, you can still get hit, so don't rest on your
| laurels...
|
|  > The user has the responsibility to be careful, I think. Not the
|  > list server.
|
| My own viewpoint is somewhat less blase than yours - the more virii
| scanners between the originator and me, the lower the likelihood of my
| systems getting a virii.
|
|  >> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
|  >> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
|
|  > Yes.
|
|  >> Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?
|
|  > Yes.
|
| Perhaps you'd care to give details, since you're so blase about it...
|
|  >>> It is analogous on how I am seeing the UNRELIABILITY of people's
|  >>> email systems. I see only failure cases, never succesfull
|  >>> deliveries!
|
|  >> Same here...
|
|  > No, you both miss the point.
|
| Oh?
|
|  > Some PEOPLE are ignorant or unreliable...
|
| Whether people are ignorant or unreliable has about as much to do with
| whether their computers can catch virii as with whether they can. The
| only people likely to claim otherwise are virii writers, IMHO.
|
|  > The email system performs exactly as instructed, no matter if it
|  > runs on Linux, or *BSD, or Mickey$oft.
|
| The basic point of this duscussion is that the email system's
| instructions are flawed and need changing.
|
| Best wishes from Riley.
|
|

Re: [OT] Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Riley Williams]

Hi William.

 > As I said in another post on the list,

 > "http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/naicommon/buy-try/try/products-evals.asp

 > Go there, select your language and LINUX, and you will get a
 > survey to fill out that then lets you test drive their stuff for
 > linux."

I've not seen that post yet, so must apologise for missing it...

 > I don't feel that I am particularly blasé, but I will concede
 > that you have several good points. My main point was that people
 > seem to be more interested in the server doing the scanning for
 > them rather than taking responsibility for their own (lack of)
 > security. Your view point is just as valid.

I've met people like that, and earn quite a reasonable living from
securing systems for computer novices. In my case, most of my
customers are elderly people who're interested in tracing their
ancestry and have been persuaded by the local computer mart that they
need a computer to do so, and nothing less than the latest all-singing
all-dancing system will do the job - and oh, Internet connectivity isa
a must so you'd better sign up to our company ISP for which we get
£X commission for everybody we sign up. I'm sure you know the type I'm
talking about...

 > And I don't think your experience with McAfee as reported is
 > typical at all. If it was, I'd still be having problems, and NAI
 > would be out of business. How long ago was this? What version of
 > the product? What OS? How did you update? What 14 Virii were you
 > hit with? Did you contact McAfee for support? I'd be very
 > interested to get more details about this.

I contacted McAfee about this straight away. Their response was that
on average, there's a timelapse of 53 hours from a virii first
appearing to their having a signature for it, and as there are at
least 370 new virii produced each day, many with multiple strains, it
was quite possible for such as I reported to happen.

The timeframe was around October 1999, so was mixed in with the
intensive Y2K tracing that was going on then, and I don't have details
of the specific virii any more, so can't advise there...

Best wishes from Riley.

[OT] Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[William Scott Lockwood III]

I hope it got out!  Perhaps someone already started striping out mail
from OE/Hotmail.  :-)

----- Original Message -----
| Hi William.
| I've not seen that post yet, so must apologise for missing it...

Re: [OT] Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Riley Williams]

Hi William.

 >> I've not seen that post yet, so must apologise for missing it...

 > I hope it got out!  Perhaps someone already started striping out mail
 > from OE/Hotmail.  :-)

I've now read every email received to date in L-K with either "Test"
or the above as the subject, and it's not amongst them...

Best wishes from Riley.

[OT] Virii (sic)

[Guest section DW]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 12:19:28AM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:

> on average, there's a timelapse of 53 hours from a virii first

For some reason, seeing "virii" is somewhat painful to my eye.
I know, people invent fantasy plurals, like Vaxen and Unices/Unixen,
but somehow this is worse, yes indeed, it is badder.

[The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses.
In Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether
virus is a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]

PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Alan Olsen]

Well, my plans to hack on a weird piece of hardware in order to
experiment with kernel hacking did not go as planned.  Seems the device
works fine without any problems at all.  (The device is the eFilm Reader-7
PCMCIA PCI card.)  The only "hacking" needed was to remove two bits of
plastic that kept me from inserting one card.

But in getting this installed, I found something that does not seem
right...

The module that used to be called "ide_cs.o" is now called "ide-cs.o".

It this on purpose or have I found a bug?

The reason I am wondering is that it requires some serious search and
replace in /etc/pcmcia/config to correct the problem or renaming the
module by hand. Not much of a hassle for me, but others will find it very
confusing.  (Especially since the rest of the card service modules seem to
use "_cs.o" instead of "-cs.o".)

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
 "All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman

Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Keith Owens]

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:03:45 -0700 (PDT), 
Alan Olsen <alan@clueserver.org> wrote:
>The module that used to be called "ide_cs.o" is now called "ide-cs.o".
>It this on purpose or have I found a bug?

drivers/ide/Makefile was added to the kernel in 2.4.3-99pre on approx.
May 19, 2000.  The module was called ide-cs.o then and has had that
name ever since.  The inconsistency between the kernel and the pcmcia
package is annoying but changing the kernel name now would probably
cause more problems that it solved.

Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Alan Olsen]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Keith Owens wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:03:45 -0700 (PDT), 
> Alan Olsen <alan@clueserver.org> wrote:
> >The module that used to be called "ide_cs.o" is now called "ide-cs.o".
> >It this on purpose or have I found a bug?
> 
> drivers/ide/Makefile was added to the kernel in 2.4.3-99pre on approx.
> May 19, 2000.  The module was called ide-cs.o then and has had that
> name ever since.  The inconsistency between the kernel and the pcmcia
> package is annoying but changing the kernel name now would probably
> cause more problems that it solved.

I found out about a minute or so *after* I sent that message that the
problem is documented in the pcmcia-cs README-2.4.  (Though it was a
little less than clear.)

I am a little surprised that the whole thing worked at all, given the
changes I had to make...

I still have a puzzling problem though.

I have a removable ide drive that has always been a bit contankerous.
Under 2.2.x, it would error out the first time, but a "cardctl reset"
would make it work fine.

Now when i try to mount it, the cardmgr code complains about a timeout on
the socket and suggests increasing setup_delay.  That does not help.  It
just delays the real problem.

When I insert the card, I get a beep from the cardmgr program seeing the
card being inserted.  Then the whole system refuses to respond to anything
on the keyboard.  (I have not tested if the system is reachable by network
when that happens.) 

The drive is powered up at that point.  If I pull the pcmcia card out,
once the process times out, the system returns to usable again.

Ideas what is causing it?  I am suspecting that I am getting some sort of
irq lockup.  All the other pcmcia devices run fine. Just ide is giving me
the problem.

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
 "All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman

Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Alan Cox]

> When I insert the card, I get a beep from the cardmgr program seeing the
> card being inserted.  Then the whole system refuses to respond to anything
> on the keyboard.  (I have not tested if the system is reachable by network
> when that happens.) 

Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem

--- linux245.orig/drivers/ide/ide-cs.c  Fri Feb  9 20:40:02 2001
+++ linux/drivers/ide/ide-cs.c  Tue Jun 26 21:22:19 2001
@@ -324,6 +324,9 @@
     if (link->io.NumPorts2)
        release_region(link->io.BasePort2, link->io.NumPorts2);
 
+    outb(0x02, ctl_base); // Set nIEN = disable device interrupts
+                         // else it hangs on PCI-Cardbus add-in cards,
wedging irq
+
     /* retry registration in case device is still spinning up */
     for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
        hd = ide_register(io_base, ctl_base, link->irq.AssignedIRQ);
--- linux245.orig/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c       Sun Mar 18 18:25:02 2001
+++ linux/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c       Tue Jun 26 21:25:07 2001
@@ -685,6 +685,8 @@
 #else /* !CONFIG_IDEPCI_SHARE_IRQ */
                int sa = (hwif->chipset == ide_pci) ? SA_INTERRUPT|SA_SHIRQ
: SA_INTERRUPT;
 #endif /* CONFIG_IDEPCI_SHARE_IRQ */
+
+               outb(0x00, hwif->io_ports[IDE_CONTROL_OFFSET]); // clear
nIEN == enable irqs
                if (ide_request_irq(hwif->irq, &ide_intr, sa, hwif->name,
hwgroup)) {
                        if (!match)
                                kfree(hwgroup);

Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Alan Olsen]

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Alan Cox wrote:

> > When I insert the card, I get a beep from the cardmgr program seeing the
> > card being inserted.  Then the whole system refuses to respond to anything
> > on the keyboard.  (I have not tested if the system is reachable by network
> > when that happens.) 
> 
> Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem

I will try that. Any reason it did not make it to 2.4.7?

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
 "All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman

Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Alan Cox]

> > Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
> 
> I will try that. Any reason it did not make it to 2.4.7?

Andre didnt like it for obscure ATA technical reasons. If it works then
personally I think its a candidate to go in anyway

Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Alan Olsen]

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Alan Cox wrote:

> > > Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
> > 
> > I will try that. Any reason it did not make it to 2.4.7?
> 
> Andre didnt like it for obscure ATA technical reasons. If it works then
> personally I think its a candidate to go in anyway

Well, without the patch it does *not* work.  I will make sure it functions
with this card.  (Weird finding PCMCIA PCI cards in the electronic camera
supply section.)

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
 "All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman

Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Alan Olsen]

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Alan Cox wrote:

> > > Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem
> > 
> > I will try that. Any reason it did not make it to 2.4.7?
> 
> Andre didnt like it for obscure ATA technical reasons. If it works then
> personally I think its a candidate to go in anyway

Well, it gets rid of the hanging behaviour.  There is a bit of
sluggishness, but it is because it is trying to setup ide2 and failing.

Aug  2 11:28:38 summanulla kernel: hde: IBM-DADA-26480, ATA DISK drive
Aug  2 11:28:38 summanulla kernel: hde: IBM-DADA-26480, ATA DISK drive
Aug  2 11:28:38 summanulla kernel: ide2: Disabled unable to get IRQ 5.
Aug  2 11:28:38 summanulla kernel: ide2: Disabled unable to get IRQ 5.
Aug  2 11:28:40 summanulla kernel: hde: ERROR, PORTS ALREADY IN USE
Aug  2 11:28:40 summanulla kernel: hde: ERROR, PORTS ALREADY IN USE
Aug  2 11:28:42 summanulla kernel: ide2: ports already in use, skipping
probe
Aug  2 11:28:42 summanulla kernel: ide2: ports already in use, skipping
probe
Aug  2 11:28:53 summanulla last message repeated 7 times
Aug  2 11:28:53 summanulla kernel: ide_cs: ide_register() at 0x110 &
0x11e, irq 5 failed
Aug  2 11:28:53 summanulla last message repeated 7 times
Aug  2 11:28:53 summanulla kernel: ide_cs: ide_register() at 0x110 &
0x11e, irq 5 failed
Aug  2 11:28:53 summanulla kernel: Trying to free nonexistent resource
<00000110-0000011f>
Aug  2 11:28:53 summanulla kernel: Trying to free nonexistent resource
<00000110-0000011f>
Aug  2 11:28:54 summanulla cardmgr[1023]: get dev info on socket 1 failed:
Resource temporarily unavailable
Aug  2 11:29:51 summanulla cardmgr[1023]: shutting down socket 1
Aug  2 11:29:51 summanulla cardmgr[1023]: executing: 'modprobe -r ide-cs'

I need to look at where ide2 is trying to be set later.  (I have a LUG
meeting to get ready for.)

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
 "All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman

Re: PCMCIA IDE_CS in 2.4.7

[Paul Mackerras]

Alan Cox writes:

> Gunther posted this patch ages ago which seems to solve the problem

I found that the first part (adding outb(0x02, ctl_base)) was
necessary but the second part (outb(0, ...)) was not.  Setting nIEN
early on seems safe to me, but it was not clear to me that enabling
IRQs (clearing nIEN) just before the ide_request_irq call was safe -
fortunately it doesn't seem to be necessary, I presume the IDE code
clears nIEN when it wants to start getting interrupts.

On my powerbook I also use a patch which makes sure that the chipset
gets set to ide_pci so that the IDE code will let me share the irq -
the pcmcia controller here has just one interrupt that is used both
for card interrupts and for controller interrupts.  I'm not sure
whether that came from Gunther or someone else.

Paul.

Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

[Riley Williams]

Hi.

 >> on average, there's a timelapse of 53 hours from a virii first

 > For some reason, seeing "virii" is somewhat painful to my eye. I
 > know, people invent fantasy plurals, like Vaxen and
 > Unices/Unixen, but somehow this is worse, yes indeed, it is
 > badder.

 > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
 > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
 > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]

During my medical training, it was made abundantly clear that the
plural of virus is virii. Since the whole idea of a computer virus
comes from the medical world, I'd have to assume the terminology came
with it.

I'll stick with what my training taught me.

Best wishes from Riley.

PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.

Re: [Ridiculously OT] Virii (sic)

[David Huen]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Riley Williams wrote:

> plural of virus is virii. Since the whole idea of a computer virus
> comes from the medical world, I'd have to assume the terminology came
> with it.
> 
> I'll stick with what my training taught me.

As an ex-virologist, English usage has its plural as viruses almost
everywhere, even in books written in "U.S." English.  Even in medical
virology texts in the aforesaid language.

Not that Caesar ever spoke at length concerning viruses, but viral
taxonomies usually refer to viruses of a kind with a collective noun
ending with thus:-

papillomaviridae - wart viruses
herpesviridae - herpesviruses
retroviridae - retroviruses

Here's an example of both the plural "viruses" and the collective
ending being used...
http://www.utoronto.ca/virology/bio351/papova/Papova.html

Indeed, if you should search Google for the terms "viruses" and "virii",
the former will find mostly biological/medical pages while the latter
while the latter finds almost exclusively descriptions of computer
"virii" which may be indicative of the orgin of the latter.

I look forward to computer virus taxonomies discussing Sircamidae and no
doubt Code Red could be classified as member of phylum Annelidae with
Linnean name Tabes whitehouseii.

> 
> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
> 
You did mean it the other way round, didn't you?

D. Huen, Dept. of Genetics, U. of Cambridge

Re: [Ridiculously OT] Virii (sic)

[Riley Williams]

Hi David.

 >> plural of virus is virii. Since the whole idea of a computer
 >> virus comes from the medical world, I'd have to assume the
 >> terminology came with it.
 >>
 >> I'll stick with what my training taught me.

 > As an ex-virologist, English usage has its plural as viruses
 > almost everywhere, even in books written in "U.S." English.
 > Even in medical virology texts in the aforesaid language.

{Shrug} Blame my training on the medical staff at Aberdeen Royal
Infirmiry, Scotland, where I did the 18 months of medical training
that I have behind me before switching to Computing...

 > Not that Caesar ever spoke at length concerning viruses, but
 > viral taxonomies usually refer to viruses of a kind with a
 > collective noun ending with thus:-
 >
 > papillomaviridae	- wart viruses
 > herpesviridae	- herpesviruses
 > retroviridae 	- retroviruses
 >
 > Here's an example of both the plural "viruses" and the
 > collective ending being used...
 >
 > http://www.utoronto.ca/virology/bio351/papova/Papova.html
 >
 > Indeed, if you should search Google for the terms "viruses" and
 > "virii", the former will find mostly biological/medical pages
 > while the latter while the latter finds almost exclusively
 > descriptions of computer "virii" which may be indicative of the
 > orgin of the latter.
 >
 > I look forward to computer virus taxonomies discussing
 > Sircamidae and no doubt Code Red could be classified as member
 > of phylum Annelidae with Linnean name Tabes whitehouseii.

 >> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.

 > You did mean it the other way round, didn't you?

I did, yes - blame that on a brain failure...mine!

 > D. Huen, Dept. of Genetics, U. of Cambridge

Best wishes from Riley.

Re: [Ridiculously OT] Virii (sic)

[Manfred Bartz]

>  >> plural of virus is virii. 

Huh?

I really don't know much Latin, but the plural of virus is viri.
Virii would be the plural of virius if there were such a thing.

Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

[Nadav Har'El]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2001, Riley Williams wrote about "Re: [OT] Virii (sic)":
>  > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
>  > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
>  > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]

What I don't understand is why people use the form virii, with a double I!

Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
(check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).

I think people get confused by the fact that the plural of radius is radii.
That extra "I" comes from the i in radius - it shouldn't appear in the plural
of "virus"! The plural of the different word "virius" should have been virii.

> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.

Note that bacteria is already plural - bacterium is the singular.

There's a more computer relevant fact: "data" is a plural noun, whose
singular is "datum". Similarly, "media" is plural, whose singular is
"medium". So constructions like "datas" or "medias" are wrong, although
they are becoming more and more accepted...

Does anybody still use the form formulae as a plural of formula? I do, but
I think I belong to a dying breed :)

[Oops, I don't think this discussion is very relevant to Linux kernels any
more...]

-- 
Nadav Har'El                        |       Wednesday, Aug  1 2001, 12 Av 5761
nyh@math.technion.ac.il             |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |A city is a large community where people
http://nadav.harel.org.il           |are lonesome together.

Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

[Alessandro Suardi]

Nadav Har'El wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2001, Riley Williams wrote about "Re: [OT] Virii (sic)":
> >  > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
> >  > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
> >  > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
> 
> What I don't understand is why people use the form virii, with a double I!
> 
> Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
> (check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
> virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
> accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).
> 
> I think people get confused by the fact that the plural of radius is radii.
> That extra "I" comes from the i in radius - it shouldn't appear in the plural
> of "virus"! The plural of the different word "virius" should have been virii.

As Andries says, there is no known use of plural of 3 nouns from the
 2nd Latin declension: vulgus, pelagus and of course virus.

This is btw referenced here: http://language.perl.com/misc/virus.html .

Hopefully the thread can be dropped...

--alessandro

"Nothing can light / the dark of the night / like a falling star"
   (Julee Cruise, "Until the end of the world" soundtrack)

Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

[Wakko Warner]

> Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
> (check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
> virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
> accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).

If the plural of mouse is mice, shouldn't the plural of spouce be spice?

-- 
 Lab tests show that use of micro$oft causes cancer in lab animals

Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

[Jean-Luc]

Stoooooooooooooooop !!

PLEASE

-------
Jean-Luc

Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

[Johan Kullstam]

"Nadav Har'El" <nyh@math.technion.ac.il> writes:

> On Wed, Aug 01, 2001, Riley Williams wrote about "Re: [OT] Virii (sic)":
> >  > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
> >  > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
> >  > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
> 
> What I don't understand is why people use the form virii, with a double I!
> 
> Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
> (check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
> virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
> accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).
> 
> I think people get confused by the fact that the plural of radius is radii.
> That extra "I" comes from the i in radius - it shouldn't appear in the plural
> of "virus"! The plural of the different word "virius" should have been virii.
> 
> > PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.
> 
> Note that bacteria is already plural - bacterium is the singular.
> 
> There's a more computer relevant fact: "data" is a plural noun, whose
> singular is "datum". Similarly, "media" is plural, whose singular is
> "medium". So constructions like "datas" or "medias" are wrong, although
> they are becoming more and more accepted...
> 
> Does anybody still use the form formulae as a plural of formula? I do, but
> I think I belong to a dying breed :)
> 
> [Oops, I don't think this discussion is very relevant to Linux kernels any
> more...]

and the ever popular boni for plural of bonus ;-)

-- 
J o h a n  K u l l s t a m
[kullstam@ne.mediaone.net]
Don't Fear the Penguin!

Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

[Vojtech Pavlik]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 07:58:51AM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
> Hi.
> 
>  >> on average, there's a timelapse of 53 hours from a virii first
> 
>  > For some reason, seeing "virii" is somewhat painful to my eye. I
>  > know, people invent fantasy plurals, like Vaxen and
>  > Unices/Unixen, but somehow this is worse, yes indeed, it is
>  > badder.
> 
>  > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
>  > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
>  > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]
> 
> During my medical training, it was made abundantly clear that the
> plural of virus is virii. Since the whole idea of a computer virus
> comes from the medical world, I'd have to assume the terminology came
> with it.
> 
> I'll stick with what my training taught me.
> 
> Best wishes from Riley.
> 
> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.

Uh? I'd say it's the other way around at least ...

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs

Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

[Rik van Riel]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Riley Williams wrote:

> I'll stick with what my training taught me.

> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.

"For badder or worse."

Rik
--
Executive summary of a recent Microsoft press release:
   "we are concerned about the GNU General Public License (GPL)"


		http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/	http://distro.conectiva.com/

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Matti Aarnio]

On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 07:02:18PM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
> Hi Matti.
> 
> First, let's have a subject that reflects the content...

  Ack, should have done that long ago...

....
>  > Of course in case of Viruses using OE security bugs, we all are
>  > seeing the distilled evil.
> 
> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?
> 
> Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?

   I have been asked, several times, if I could integrate some
virus scanner wrapper, like Amavis, into ZMailer.  The more I think
of that, the more it appears to be stuff for 3.x series of ZMailer;
not for current 2.x  ...  but the technology slated for 3.x implements
something like 2/3 of Amavis for other internal system purposes ...

Nevertheless, that is just the interface from email system to separate 
file scanner.  Those scanners are available in abundance for winblows,
but are very rare for anything else.   Amavis pages seem to point to
a bunch of products with Linux support, so perhaps there are something
usefull to be plugged in ?


>  > Doing it at lists is waste of time, and misses *MY* attention!
> Hopefully, this caught your attention...
> 
> Best wishes from Riley.

/Matti Aarnio

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[William Scott Lockwood III]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matti Aarnio" <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>
To: "Riley Williams" <rhw@MemAlpha.CX>
Cc: "Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists


| Nevertheless, that is just the interface from email system to separate
| file scanner.  Those scanners are available in abundance for winblows,
| but are very rare for anything else.   Amavis pages seem to point to
| a bunch of products with Linux support, so perhaps there are something
| usefull to be plugged in ?

http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/naicommon/buy-try/try/products-evals.asp

Go there, select your language and LINUX, and you will get a survey to
fill out that then lets you test drive their stuff for linux.

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Dominik Kubla]

On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 07:02:18PM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:

> Is there any way we can set up an automatic virus scan of all
> attachments at vger, and have it deal with any virii at source?

Yes: www.amavis.org

> Come to that, is there a decent Linux-based virus scanner around?

The german antivirus tool AntiVir is free for personal use (www.free-av.com)
and i am pretty sure they would sponsor a version for the list server if asked
(if linux-kernel would be considered commercial use).

But even better would be to also use the procmail sanitizer:
  ftp://ftp.rubyriver.com/pub/jhardin/antispam/procmail-security.html

It does not scan for virii but defangs attachments and html tags so that
braindamaged apps would not automatically execute the required interpreter
for the virus.

Dominik Kubla
-- 
ScioByte GmbH, Zum Schiersteiner Grund 2, 55127 Mainz (Germany)
Phone: +49 6131 550 117  Fax: +49 6131 610 99 16

GnuPG: 717F16BB / A384 F5F1 F566 5716 5485  27EF 3B00 C007 717F 16BB

Re: Virii on vger.kernel.org lists

[Dominik Kubla]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 12:49:56PM +0200, Dominik Kubla wrote:

> The german antivirus tool AntiVir is free for personal use (www.free-av.com)
> and i am pretty sure they would sponsor a version for the list server if asked
> (if linux-kernel would be considered commercial use).

Hmm. Apparently their free product is just available for Windows. ARGH! But
one can pickup an evaluation version for Linux from their commercial site:

www.antivir.de.

Dominik Kubla
-- 
ScioByte GmbH, Zum Schiersteiner Grund 2, 55127 Mainz (Germany)
Phone: +49 6131 550 117  Fax: +49 6131 610 99 16

GnuPG: 717F16BB / A384 F5F1 F566 5716 5485  27EF 3B00 C007 717F 16BB

RE: Test mail

[Torrey Hoffman]

I hate to jump in and extend this mostly off-topic thread, but I would be
a little annoyed if Outlook was banned from LKML.  I've got two machines
on my desk here at work - one is Win2K, and is used almost exclusively for 
Outlook and Word.  It's very difficult to give those up when the rest of
the company uses them extensively.  The automatic meeting scheduling and
other MS Exchange features of Outlook are not available in other clients, 
and why should I switch when Outlook works fine?  

Of course the other computer runs Linux, and is where all my real work
gets done.  It's convenient to have both environments.

Why not just filter all non-text attachments instead?  Patches, log files, 
output of lspci, and the like should all be inlined anyway.  It's easy
to configure Outlook to send plain text emails, like this one - I've sent
kernel patches from Outlook before, and no one has complained.

Torrey

- - - - -

Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> Ignacio Vazquez-Ab writes:
> > On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, christophe barbé wrote:
 
> >> Would it not be simple and effective to filter out mail produced by
> >> Outlook?

[...] 

> > Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of Outlook or OE, but you
> > can't just step on people who use them.

[...]
 
> Banning Outlook isn't so bad. Assuming you are stuck with Windows,
> you still have many choices. Netscape/Mozilla and Eudora would be
> the obvious choices. 

[...]

Re: Test mail

[Albert D. Cahalan]

Torrey Hoffman writes:

> I hate to jump in and extend this mostly off-topic thread, but I would be
> a little annoyed if Outlook was banned from LKML.  I've got two machines
> on my desk here at work - one is Win2K, and is used almost exclusively for 
> Outlook and Word.  It's very difficult to give those up when the rest of
> the company uses them extensively.  The automatic meeting scheduling and
> other MS Exchange features of Outlook are not available in other clients, 
> and why should I switch when Outlook works fine?  
>
> Of course the other computer runs Linux, and is where all my real work
> gets done.  It's convenient to have both environments.

This does not mean you have to use Outlook to _send_ mail to
the linux-kernel mailing list. Do this:

1. log into the Linux box you have
2. run emacs
3. Control-x m
4. fill in the header fields and write your message
5. Control-c Control-c

If you really must send mail directly from the Windows box,
get emacs for Windows and skip step 1 above.

BTW, if you can't log into anything that can open an SMTP connection
to the outside world and don't have a relay, then most likely your
employer doesn't want you sending stuff to linux-kernel anyway.

Re: Test mail

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 03:19:17PM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> Torrey Hoffman writes:
> > I hate to jump in and extend this mostly off-topic thread, but I would be
> > a little annoyed if Outlook was banned from LKML.  I've got two machines
> > on my desk here at work - one is Win2K, and is used almost exclusively for 
[snip]
> This does not mean you have to use Outlook to _send_ mail to
> the linux-kernel mailing list. Do this:

There already are readers of LKML who filter listmail from Outlook/'Internet
mail server' into /dev/null.

Re: Test mail

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Gregory Maxwell <greg@linuxpower.cx> writes:

> On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 03:19:17PM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> There already are readers of LKML who filter listmail from
> Outlook/'Internet

  /hotmail.com

> mail server' into /dev/null.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org

Re: Test mail

[christophe barbé]

My proposal to block mail composed with Outlook was half serious but I
believe that the reason behind this half serious side is that it educates
users.

I don't care when I receive a virus. But It means that somebody lurking
lkml has most likely launch an unknown attachment. 
And this is the main way viruses are propagated. Only a small number of
viruses use Outlook giant security hole that allows to execute an
attachment without user action (other that viewing the mail). Sircam like
ILoveYou&co need help from stupid (uneducated) user.

So if you forbid Outlook and explain why, people becomes more aware of this
problem.
And this is important, specially important on this RED CODE day where even
Microsoft advices its NT users to shutdown their machine. I would not be
astonished to have Internet problem today due to the wasted bandwidth.

Christophe   


Le lun, 30 jui 2001 20:33:55, Gregory Maxwell a écrit :
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 03:19:17PM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> > Torrey Hoffman writes:
> > > I hate to jump in and extend this mostly off-topic thread, but I
> would be
> > > a little annoyed if Outlook was banned from LKML.  I've got two
> machines
> > > on my desk here at work - one is Win2K, and is used almost
> exclusively for 
> [snip]
> > This does not mean you have to use Outlook to _send_ mail to
> > the linux-kernel mailing list. Do this:
> 
> There already are readers of LKML who filter listmail from
> Outlook/'Internet
> mail server' into /dev/null.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 
-- 
Christophe Barbé
Software Engineer - christophe.barbe@lineo.fr
Lineo France - Lineo High Availability Group
42-46, rue Médéric - 92110 Clichy - France
phone (33).1.41.40.02.12 - fax (33).1.41.40.02.01
http://www.lineo.com

Re: Test mail

[William Scott Lockwood III]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 654 bytes --]

Here you have hit on the real problem.

I got hit with a virus this way once long ago - I did something about
it.  No more problems.  IN fact, anyone who's using McAfee to scan their
mail under 9x/NT is fine.  Even if they try to open the attachment.

So banning Outlook/Hotmail is not the answer.  Education is.

Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "christophe barbé" <christophe.barbe@lineo.fr>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 3:27 AM
Subject: Re: Test mail


My proposal to block mail composed with Outlook was half serious but I
believe that the reason behind this half serious side is that it
educates
users.

RE: Test mail

[Torrey Hoffman]

Albert D. Cahalan wrote:

> This does not mean you have to use Outlook to _send_ mail to
> the linux-kernel mailing list. Do this:

[...]

(sigh.) So you want me to change the way I (and other people) work 
so.... Why was it again?  So we can block the one message in 1000 
that contains a Windows virus and was sent from Outlook?  

and, incidentally, block bug reports and other potentially useful 
mail and valid help requests from people who may not be subscribed, 
may be having difficulty installing Linux... 

And you think that's better than just blocking the viruses, or 
binary attachments in general, or something else more rational?

Please.

Torrey

Re: Test mail

[Per Jessen]

>On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:19:17 -0400 (EDT), Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>
>Torrey Hoffman writes:
>
>> I hate to jump in and extend this mostly off-topic thread, but I would be
>> a little annoyed if Outlook was banned from LKML.  I've got two machines
>> on my desk here at work - one is Win2K, and is used almost exclusively for 
>> Outlook and Word.  It's very difficult to give those up when the rest of
>> the company uses them extensively.  The automatic meeting scheduling and
>> other MS Exchange features of Outlook are not available in other clients, 
>> and why should I switch when Outlook works fine?  

Completely agree. I am in the exact same situation. I need/want to follow
Linux development, but my corporate desktop is MS, Outlook etc. 
What's wrong with that ? (my development systems are not connected to 
anything else but our internal network.)

>> Of course the other computer runs Linux, and is where all my real work
>> gets done.  It's convenient to have both environments.
>
>This does not mean you have to use Outlook to _send_ mail to
>the linux-kernel mailing list. Do this:
>
>1. log into the Linux box you have
>2. run emacs
>3. Control-x m
>4. fill in the header fields and write your message
>5. Control-c Control-c

Bollocks. Look, the main target here is practicality, and what
you just demonstrated was plainly impractical.

>If you really must send mail directly from the Windows box,
>get emacs for Windows and skip step 1 above.

This is an awful lot of effort just to overcome some peoples
failure to avoid double-clicking on attachments in Outlook.

>
>BTW, if you can't log into anything that can open an SMTP connection
>to the outside world and don't have a relay, then most likely your
>employer doesn't want you sending stuff to linux-kernel anyway.

Disagree. See above and join life in the real world.


regards,
Per Jessen, Zurich.

regards,
Per Jessen

Re: Test mail

[William Scott Lockwood III]

Basically, I use a hotmail and Outlook Express to help me SORT messages
on LKML.  It makes it MUCH easier for me to find the messages I want to
read vs the rest of the noise that I don't understand yet.

One thing is certain:  It is impossible to have a collection of geeks
this large, and not have some of them display the sort of egotistical
attitude that makes them go "Oh, he's using OE?  Well, I shall thumb my
nose in his general direction!  We should only allow
<Pine|Mutt|Emacs|Other> on this list.  Sniff.  Sniff.".

Just ignore it.  I do.  I learn more and more from this list everyday,
and if someone doesn't want to read what I have to say because of the
software I use to read the list, then I guess I'm not all that
interested in them reading it anyway.  :-)

Regards,
Scott
webmaster, http://www.geekizoid.com/ <-- Running Linux...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Per Jessen" <per@computer.org>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: Test mail


| >On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:19:17 -0400 (EDT), Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
| >
| >Torrey Hoffman writes:
| >
| >> I hate to jump in and extend this mostly off-topic thread, but I
would be
| >> a little annoyed if Outlook was banned from LKML.  I've got two
machines
| >> on my desk here at work - one is Win2K, and is used almost
exclusively for
| >> Outlook and Word.  It's very difficult to give those up when the
rest of
| >> the company uses them extensively.  The automatic meeting
scheduling and
| >> other MS Exchange features of Outlook are not available in other
clients,
| >> and why should I switch when Outlook works fine?
|
| Completely agree. I am in the exact same situation. I need/want to
follow
| Linux development, but my corporate desktop is MS, Outlook etc.
| What's wrong with that ? (my development systems are not connected to
| anything else but our internal network.)
|
| >> Of course the other computer runs Linux, and is where all my real
work
| >> gets done.  It's convenient to have both environments.
| >
| >This does not mean you have to use Outlook to _send_ mail to
| >the linux-kernel mailing list. Do this:
| >
| >1. log into the Linux box you have
| >2. run emacs
| >3. Control-x m
| >4. fill in the header fields and write your message
| >5. Control-c Control-c
|
| Bollocks. Look, the main target here is practicality, and what
| you just demonstrated was plainly impractical.
|
| >If you really must send mail directly from the Windows box,
| >get emacs for Windows and skip step 1 above.
|
| This is an awful lot of effort just to overcome some peoples
| failure to avoid double-clicking on attachments in Outlook.
|
| >
| >BTW, if you can't log into anything that can open an SMTP connection
| >to the outside world and don't have a relay, then most likely your
| >employer doesn't want you sending stuff to linux-kernel anyway.
|
| Disagree. See above and join life in the real world.
|
|
| regards,
| Per Jessen, Zurich.
|
| regards,
| Per Jessen

Re: Test mail

[christophe barbé]

Le lun, 30 jui 2001 22:23:03, William Scott Lockwood III a écrit :
> Basically, I use a hotmail and Outlook Express to help me SORT messages
> on LKML.  It makes it MUCH easier for me to find the messages I want to
> read vs the rest of the noise that I don't understand yet.

Sick ...

And btw you should read the various HotMail agreements you have signed.

Re: Test mail

[William Scott Lockwood III]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1080 bytes --]

Sick?  No.

As much as we dislike M$'s marketing practices, one has to admit that
they DO come up with some GOOD solutions to problems, they just bundle
them into BAD implementations that are non-free.

As I said earlier, the problem isn't hotmail - the problem is attitudes
like yours.

Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "christophe barbé" <christophe.barbe@lineo.fr>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 3:34 AM
Subject: Re: Test mail



Le lun, 30 jui 2001 22:23:03, William Scott Lockwood III a écrit :
> Basically, I use a hotmail and Outlook Express to help me SORT
messages
> on LKML.  It makes it MUCH easier for me to find the messages I want
to
> read vs the rest of the noise that I don't understand yet.

Sick ...

And btw you should read the various HotMail agreements you have signed.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: Test mail

[christophe barbé]

Hi William Scott Lockwood III,

In your mails, you use outlook and hotmail together.
This is a mistake.

Outlook is a "not so bad idea" but which comes with a collection of
security holes. Eudora is definetly a better choice.

Hotmail is a http-based mail owned by microsoft. And all contents which go
in it become potential Microsoft content (there's a kind of implicit
copyright transfert between you end Microsoft).
You should read carrefully what you have (implicitly perhaps) signed.
You should avoid Hotmail. This is not related to M$ against Linux but to
your rights (to access and only you to your data)  against M$ profits. From
the Microsoft point of view, Hotmail License is an improvment over the way
they lock their clients by using proprietary (embraced-and-extanded)
protocols and standarts.  
Hotmail was the first site to use Microsoft Passport, which is the a draft
of .Net. If you accept Hotmail today you will accept the worst of .Net
tomorrow.

btw You said that Microsoft comes with good solutions.
This view (linux is not user friendly) is partly wrong because what is said
to be not user friendly is caused by people not accepting differences.
M$ users are scared by what we call the unix-way.

To conclude and I will stop following this thread, I'm against adding IQ
test in the lkml subscribe process.

Christophe

PS: I don't remember the name but there is a unix tool that provide
everything for MsExchange sharing facilities.

Le mar, 31 jui 2001 13:42:20, William Scott Lockwood III a écrit :
> Sick?  No.
> 
> As much as we dislike M$'s marketing practices, one has to admit that
> they DO come up with some GOOD solutions to problems, they just bundle
> them into BAD implementations that are non-free.
> 
> As I said earlier, the problem isn't hotmail - the problem is attitudes
> like yours.
> 
> Scott
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "christophe barbé" <christophe.barbe@lineo.fr>
> To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 3:34 AM
> Subject: Re: Test mail
> 
> 
> 
> Le lun, 30 jui 2001 22:23:03, William Scott Lockwood III a écrit :
> > Basically, I use a hotmail and Outlook Express to help me SORT
> messages
> > on LKML.  It makes it MUCH easier for me to find the messages I want
> to
> > read vs the rest of the noise that I don't understand yet.
> 
> Sick ...
> 
> And btw you should read the various HotMail agreements you have signed.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 
> 
-- 
Christophe Barbé
Software Engineer - christophe.barbe@lineo.fr
Lineo France - Lineo High Availability Group
42-46, rue Médéric - 92110 Clichy - France
phone (33).1.41.40.02.12 - fax (33).1.41.40.02.01
http://www.lineo.com

Re: Test mail

[Alexander V. Bilichenko]

Is too silly to speak about what you most likely did not see at all.  All
security BUGS can be fixed checking "more restricted". If it configured
correctly all should be ok.
I use Outlook and I have never been infected with any email virus because of
it.
Best regards,
       Alexander      mailto:dmor@7ka.mipt.ru
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets start the war, said Meggy
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "christophe barbé" <christophe.barbe@lineo.fr>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: Test mail


>
> Le lun, 30 jui 2001 22:23:03, William Scott Lockwood III a écrit :
> > Basically, I use a hotmail and Outlook Express to help me SORT messages
> > on LKML.  It makes it MUCH easier for me to find the messages I want to
> > read vs the rest of the noise that I don't understand yet.
>
> Sick ...
>
> And btw you should read the various HotMail agreements you have signed.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

Re: Test mail

[Per Jessen]

>On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:38:02 -0400 (EDT), Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
>
>On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>
>> Banning Outlook isn't so bad. Assuming you are stuck with Windows,
>> you still have many choices. Netscape/Mozilla and Eudora would be
>> the obvious choices. I think you can get pine. Emacs has been
>> ported to Windows, so you have the rmail/gnus stuff. Surely you
>> can tolerate at least one of these many choices.
>
>The problem is that in plenty of large companies not only are you stuck with
>Windows, but you're also stuck with either Outlook or Notes because of
>corporate decisions (i.e., Exchange or Domino). Trust me; been there, done
>that.

And me. And in reality there is nothing really wrong with that. The world
isn't black and white - it's not Windows or Linux either. For a corporation
of eg. 20.000 Windows desktops, you need a lot of convincing to switch the desktop
to Linux. Even if one of your core products is Linux based. 
The fact is that your corporate desktop has little or nothing to do with your 
products. Get it ? If that WERE the case, a lot of the corporations still 
writing and shipping OS/390 software would have a serious problem. 
(been there and done that too)

So, please, don't blame Outlook in this context - it IS a user problem - Outlook
is just a *relatively* innocent mail-client. 



regards,
Per Jessen, Zurich

Windows 2001: "I'm sorry Dave ...  I'm afraid I can't do that."
(borrowed from zinc.anode@enidan.com)

Re: Test mail

[Admin Mailing Lists]

4 words.. mail server virus scanner.

btw, does anyone know of (and please reply off-list as this is way OT)
any virus scanners for unix-type MTAs that keep an updated virii db
on-server via automatic remote updates from virus centers like symantec
(or anywhere else that would have an updated list of virii to plug into
the local db)?

-Tony
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-.
Anthony J. Biacco                       Network Administrator/Engineer
thelittleprince@asteroid-b612.org       Intergrafix Internet Services

    "Dream as if you'll live forever, live as if you'll die today"
http://www.asteroid-b612.org                http://www.intergrafix.net
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Per Jessen wrote:

> >On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:38:02 -0400 (EDT), Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> >
> >On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> >
> >> Banning Outlook isn't so bad. Assuming you are stuck with Windows,
> >> you still have many choices. Netscape/Mozilla and Eudora would be
> >> the obvious choices. I think you can get pine. Emacs has been
> >> ported to Windows, so you have the rmail/gnus stuff. Surely you
> >> can tolerate at least one of these many choices.
> >
> >The problem is that in plenty of large companies not only are you stuck with
> >Windows, but you're also stuck with either Outlook or Notes because of
> >corporate decisions (i.e., Exchange or Domino). Trust me; been there, done
> >that.
> 
> And me. And in reality there is nothing really wrong with that. The world
> isn't black and white - it's not Windows or Linux either. For a corporation
> of eg. 20.000 Windows desktops, you need a lot of convincing to switch the desktop
> to Linux. Even if one of your core products is Linux based. 
> The fact is that your corporate desktop has little or nothing to do with your 
> products. Get it ? If that WERE the case, a lot of the corporations still 
> writing and shipping OS/390 software would have a serious problem. 
> (been there and done that too)
> 
> So, please, don't blame Outlook in this context - it IS a user problem - Outlook
> is just a *relatively* innocent mail-client. 
> 
> 
> 
> regards,
> Per Jessen, Zurich
> 
> Windows 2001: "I'm sorry Dave ...  I'm afraid I can't do that."
> (borrowed from zinc.anode@enidan.com)
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

Re: fix TCP roundtrip time update code

[kuznet]

Hello!

> This might be the solution to one of the 'must-fix' bugs for the
> networking, which nobody so far was quite able to track down.

No doubts. All the symptoms are explained by this. I hope Andrew
will confirm that the problem has gone.

Alexey

Re: fix TCP roundtrip time update code

[Nivedita Singhvi]

kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote:

> No doubts. All the symptoms are explained by this. I hope Andrew
> will confirm that the problem has gone.

Yep, great catch! But, FYI, DaveM and Alexey, we tried
reproducing the stalls we (Dave Hansen, Troy Wilson) had
seen during SpecWeb99 runs and couldn't reproduce them on
2.5.69. (Same config, etc). So its possible our hang/stalls
were some other issue that got silently fixed (or more
likely, possibly the same thing but other changes minimized
us running into the problem).

thanks,
Nivedita

Re: fix TCP roundtrip time update code

[David S. Miller]

   From: Nivedita Singhvi <niv@us.ibm.com>
   Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 19:01:25 -0700
   
   But, FYI, DaveM and Alexey, we tried
   reproducing the stalls we (Dave Hansen, Troy Wilson) had
   seen during SpecWeb99 runs and couldn't reproduce them on
   2.5.69. (Same config, etc). So its possible our hang/stalls
   were some other issue that got silently fixed (or more
   likely, possibly the same thing but other changes minimized
   us running into the problem).
   
I think this means nothing, and that you can infer nothing from such
results.

My understanding is that the problem case triggers only when a timeout
based retransmit occurs.  On LAN this tends to be extremely rare.
Although under enough traffic load it can occur.

So if your old SpecWEB99 lab tended more to trigger timeout based
retransmits on LAN, and your new test network does not, then your new
test network will tend to not reproduce the bug regardless of whether
the bug is present in the kernel or not :-)

Re: fix TCP roundtrip time update code

[David Mosberger]

>>>>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 20:23:20 -0700 (PDT), "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> said:

  DaveM>    From: Nivedita Singhvi <niv@us.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 03 Jun
  DaveM> 2003 19:01:25 -0700
  DaveM>    But, FYI, DaveM and Alexey, we tried reproducing the
  DaveM> stalls we (Dave Hansen, Troy Wilson) had seen during
  DaveM> SpecWeb99 runs and couldn't reproduce them on 2.5.69. (Same
  DaveM> config, etc). So its possible our hang/stalls were some other
  DaveM> issue that got silently fixed (or more likely, possibly the
  DaveM> same thing but other changes minimized us running into the
  DaveM> problem).

  DaveM> I think this means nothing, and that you can infer nothing
  DaveM> from such results.

  DaveM> My understanding is that the problem case triggers only when
  DaveM> a timeout based retransmit occurs.  On LAN this tends to be
  DaveM> extremely rare.  Although under enough traffic load it can
  DaveM> occur.

  DaveM> So if your old SpecWEB99 lab tended more to trigger timeout
  DaveM> based retransmits on LAN, and your new test network does not,
  DaveM> then your new test network will tend to not reproduce the bug
  DaveM> regardless of whether the bug is present in the kernel or not
  DaveM> :-)

Is this where I get to plug httperf?  It triggered the bug reliably in
less than 10 secs. ;-)

	--david

Re: fix TCP roundtrip time update code

[Nivedita Singhvi]

David Mosberger wrote:

>   DaveM> So if your old SpecWEB99 lab tended more to trigger timeout
>   DaveM> based retransmits on LAN, and your new test network does not,
>   DaveM> then your new test network will tend to not reproduce the bug
>   DaveM> regardless of whether the bug is present in the kernel or not
>   DaveM> :-)
> 
> Is this where I get to plug httperf?  It triggered the bug reliably in
> less than 10 secs. ;-)

Tarnation!! Ran httperf! Didnt hit it! :(. What were your
settings?

I extracted an old debug patch to implement dropping of
packets - have a sysctl that controls the rate at which I
can drop IP packets, so can also generate any kind of packet
loss..So thought I would bang away with netperf using
sendfile()/TCP_CORK. Thought it was in that code path.
Will be running tests tmrw and the rest of this
week on 2.5.70 +- patch. Will see if I can provoke any
further hangs, stalls, wackiness of any flavor...

thanks,
Nivedita

Re: fix TCP roundtrip time update code

[David Mosberger]

>>>>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 21:40:18 -0700, Nivedita Singhvi <niv@us.ibm.com> said:

  Nivedita> David Mosberger wrote:
  DaveM> So if your old SpecWEB99 lab tended more to trigger timeout
  DaveM> based retransmits on LAN, and your new test network does not,
  DaveM> then your new test network will tend to not reproduce the bug
  DaveM> regardless of whether the bug is present in the kernel or not
  DaveM> :-)

  >>  Is this where I get to plug httperf?  It triggered the bug
  >> reliably in less than 10 secs. ;-)

  Nivedita> Tarnation!! Ran httperf! Didnt hit it! :(. What were your
  Nivedita> settings?

I used:

 $ httperf --rate 1000 --num-conns 1000000 --verbose --hog --server HOST \
	--uri pathto30KBfile

on 3 clients (for a total of 3000 conns/sec).  You can't go higher
than 1000 conn/sec per client (IP address) because otherwise you run
out of port space (due to TIME_WAIT).

This load worked well for a machine with a single GigE card.  All
network tunables were on the default setting (in particular, the tx
queue len was 300, which is were the losses came from).

With this load, I saw bad RTT values in the route cache within a
couple of seconds after starting the third httperf generator.  It then
took a bit longer (on the order of 1-2 minutes) until the first
TCPAbortFailed errors started to pop up.

	--david

Re: fix TCP roundtrip time update code

[Nivedita Singhvi]

David Mosberger wrote:

>  $ httperf --rate 1000 --num-conns 1000000 --verbose --hog --server HOST \
> 	--uri pathto30KBfile

Hmm, ditto, except I was way down at --rate 300 (was seeing client
errors of fd-unavail). Have ulimited upwards but am still seeing
them..

> on 3 clients (for a total of 3000 conns/sec).  You can't go higher
> than 1000 conn/sec per client (IP address) because otherwise you run
> out of port space (due to TIME_WAIT).

You can hike /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_tw_recycle for that.

> This load worked well for a machine with a single GigE card.  All
> network tunables were on the default setting (in particular, the tx
> queue len was 300, which is were the losses came from).
> 
> With this load, I saw bad RTT values in the route cache within a
> couple of seconds after starting the third httperf generator.  It then
> took a bit longer (on the order of 1-2 minutes) until the first
> TCPAbortFailed errors started to pop up

I saw a few AbortOnTimeouts, but no AbortFailed counts.

Those should be TCPAbortOnTimeout counts, rather than TCPAbortFailed
errors, I would expect? Why AbortFailed?  Coming from IP via
tcp_transmit_skb()?

thanks,
Nivedita

test mail

[panchi]

testmail

Test mail

[ashok]

Hi Sir/Madam

 

We have a problem in getting mails from your mailbox
would you please reply this mail .

 

Thanks

Ashok


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

test mail

[Dinesh Kumar]

 
 

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

test mail

[Adhiraj]

test mail

test mail

[Chinmaya Mishra]

test mail

test mail

[Pradeep G]

SASKEN BUSINESS DISCLAIMER
-------------------------
This message may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. In 
case you are not the original intended Recipient of the message, you must not, directly or 
indirectly, use, Disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message and you are 
requested to delete it and inform the sender. Any views expressed in this message are 
those of the individual sender unless otherwise stated. Nothing contained in this message 
shall be construed as an offer or acceptance of any offer by Sasken Communication 
Technologies Limited ("Sasken") unless sent with that express intent and with due 
authority of Sasken. Sasken has taken enough precautions to prevent the spread of 
viruses. However the company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus 
transmitted by this email

Test mail

[Rajat Jain]

test mail

[Pranith Kumar]

I sent a patch earlier which does not appear here. Just wondering why!

-- 
Pranith

Test mail

[LIYONG]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312", Size: 172 bytes --]

 		 	   		  ÿôèº{.nÇ+‰·Ÿ®‰­†+%ŠËÿ±éݶ\x17¥Šwÿº{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±þG«éÿŠ{ayº\x1dʇڙë,j\a­¢f£¢·hšïêÿ‘êçz_è®\x03(­éšŽŠÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?™¨è­Ú&£ø§~á¶iO•æ¬z·švØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?–I¥

Test mail

[Bruce Chang (VAS)]

I'm sorry for this mail to disturbing you.
It's just a test mail.

Bruce
The information transmitted in this e-mail is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, and delete this e-mail and any attachments. Thank you.

Test Mail

[Tim Guo(BJ-RD)]

Hello,
        This is just a test mail.
        Sorry for the inconvenience.

Tim


保密声明：
本邮件含有保密或专有信息，仅供指定收件人使用。严禁对本邮件或其内容做任何未经授权的查阅、使用、复制或转发。
CONFIDENTIAL NOTE:
This email contains confidential or legally privileged information and is for the sole use of its intended recipient. Any unauthorized review, use, copying or forwarding of this email or the content of this email is strictly prohibited.

test mail

[Jeffrin Thalakkottoor]

this is a test mail

-- 
software engineer
rajagiri school of engineering and technology

test mail

[IT Department]

Hello goodday this is a test mail please reply ok if you get this 
message.

test mail

[Hoi]