Circa 2000-Jun-20 15:05:17 +0100 schrieb Jethro R Binks:
[Vadim lets off steam about Windows file extensions.]
: No, it's not, but we (unfortunately) have to work around it. That's how
: Windows works. Deal with it.
s/works/is broken/
: I quite agree; I wasn't suggesting doing it unilaterally -- the above was
: the suggestion which I refined for the common case that we've seen. The
: point about .txt. or .gif. is that it *seems* to be benign, and is more
: likely to trick someone who hasn't quite woken up yet into opening up the
: attachment, thinking "it's a txt [or gif] file, not dangerous".
How about .txt.gz, .txt.bz2, .txt.Z? Watch out for those dangerous
compressed files.
: Perhaps they do; but it won't stop them using such products, and it
: won't stop us trying to protect them anyway, however difficult or
: impossible it might be in the long run.
Think of it as genetic selection. Businesses that insist on using
broken, insecure MUAs will eventually die off. The ones using better
ones won't.
--
jim knoble | jmknoble@??? |
http://www.jmknoble.cx/