RE: [inbox] Re: Re: E-Mail viruses

["Chris DeVoney" <cdevoney () u washington edu>]

On Friday, March 05, 2004 12:20 PM, Curt Purdy wrote:

> Methinks you misunderstand.  Only the proprietary extension, 
> i.e. .inc or .xyz or .whatever, would be allowed through, and 
> since virus writers would never use this extension, it would 
> eliminate ALL viruses at the gateway.
> The nice thing about this approach is that it completely 
> eliminates the need for any anti-virus on the mail server 
> since all virus attachments are automatically dropped without 
> the need for scanning.  Quite a simple, yet elegant solution, 
> if I do say so myself.

And (I think this paraphrases a collective thought) happens when the virus
writers start sending attachments using that "magic" extension and include a
social-engineered message in the e-mail to rename this thing to a .exe and
execute it.?


cdv

------------------------
Chris DeVoney
Clinical Research Center Informatics
University of Washington
cdevoney () u washington edu
206-598-6816 
------------------------

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