Re: [Exim] [Heads up] W32/Yaha.E p

On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

> Does that mean that the cited filter is "crappy"? I don't think so.
> Doesn't that rather say something about the software which needs to be
> protected from harm by the deployment of such filters?

Unpatched software, in this case. But yes, it does seem to fall into the
"should never have happened in the first place" category.

> 3. mailing list sends what it describes as a "probe", saying this is
> to test your address and if you bounce this then we'll unsubscribe
> you. Again this is quite normal in our experience - BUT this dumb
> list went and appended yet another copy of the virus-infested mail to
> the probe, consequently we bounced it again, and they unsubscribed
> him. Of course the user never got any of these; the postmaster had to
> pass the news on to him manually.

Sort of similar: if you bounce virus-infected mail to e.g. an ISP's abuse
desk (with a polite note attached asking them to notify their customer),
some auto-responders kindly return a copy of the virus. This can lead to a
whole lot of fun....

--
Juha Saarinen