Re[2]: Re: [FD] FD should block attachments

["phased" <phased () mail ru>]

what about the wasted time/bandwidth for messages like this?

-----Original Message-----
From: "Mike Smith" <mike () sane com>
To: "Luke Norman" <luke () normanonline co uk>,<full-disclosure () lists netsys com>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 19:36:50 -0400
Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] Re: [FD] FD should block attachments

> > > am i missing something here?
> > > because i realy do not see the issue.
> >
> > Yes, you are
> > As far as I can see from the numerous postings on the list, the issue 
> > isn't really recieving virii or anything else, it's the wasted 
> > time/bandwidth etc etc that comes from attatchments, and the costs that
>
> > places on users who pay by the minute or by the megabyte. I personally 
> > don't think attatchments should be stopped, but I believe that's the 
> > argument for their filtering?
> > Luke
>
>       Having followed this list for the previous year, I can not say
> that any and all possible attachments waste any more time than some of
> the conversations that take place.  It gets ridiculous...  For me, it's
> down to about 1 of every 10 threads and 1 of every 25 posts that holds
> any interest of useful information...  Those are approaching my unusable
> limits....
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html