On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Graham Wood wrote:
> > Good mailinglists have virus filter installed so every incoming mail gets
> > checked and deletes virus mails
>
> I personally would not think this is a good idea. Since it is
> possible to have false positives, you could end up blocking a
> legitimate post by doing that.
So don't virus scan. Simply bounce or quietly discard any message that
has an executable file attachment. Those have *no business* on this
list.
> Since most people on a security related list are likely to know
> that they should be careful about viruses, the mere fact they are
> sent to the list is actually not a problem to me.
It is to me. How many people are subscribed to this list * how many
attack messages a day is it reflecting * 120kb+ for each message = how
many megabytes of bandwidth is this wasting for everybody involved?
The mailing list should be filtered on the input to reject executable
attachment, or it should be made subscribers-only.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ ICQ#15735746 http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin_at_impsec.org pgpk -a jhardin_at_wolfenet.com
768: 0x41EA94F5 - A3 0C 5B C2 EF 0D 2C E5 E9 BF C8 33 A7 A9 CE 76
1024: 0xB8732E79 - 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"They [media giants] have no idea how to do business with resourceful
human beings rather than passive vegetables. So they run to [the]
government for protection."
-- Doc Searls on the SSSCA, in Linux Journal
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
920 days until the Presidential Election
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users_at_lists.freeswan.org
http://lists.freeswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Mon Jul 29 2002 - 05:19:56 CEST