VIRUS question..

[riverman]

So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch virus?
I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted, but
they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?

--riverman
(don't bother sending a personal email reply..)

[Herman Nijland]

riverman wrote:
> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted, but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
>
> --riverman
> (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)
>
>

Nothing yet, so far.

--
Herman

[JR]

riverman wrote:
>
> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted, but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
>
> --riverman
> (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)

I had two web-based email accounts. One Yahoo and the other Hotmail. I
had to abandon the Yahoo account for the reason you mention. The
Hotmail account can be set to a more draconian filter setting, allowing
only addresses on a user-defined safe list through. Not perfect, but at
least I don't spend part of every day emptying a full junk mail folder.

JR

[Yuji Sakuma]

I am not a propeller head but it sounds to me like you have the virus living
in your machine and things won't improve until you clean it out. It
happened to me too (thanks too w32/Swen.A). I thought about whether to keep
my installed software and files and disinfect or alternatively, to reformat
my hard drive. I had time so I opted to reformat and reinstall my software
and data files. I then subscribed to a firewall and virus protection
service from my isp. I got along for over 10 years without such things but
it seems that they are now essential. This has reduced the junk mail to a
trickle, so far at least.

Best regards,

Yuji Sakuma

================================================== =============
"riverman" > wrote in message
...
> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
>
> --riverman
> (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)
>
>

[riverman]

I don't think I have the virus in my drive, as I have been disinfecting it
about twice a week. Has anyone seen my address as their source?

OTOH, I do seem to be getting it mailed to me a lot since my real email
somehow got onto the newsgroups, but I have a firewall that screens it out
into my trash bin for Yahoo.com, where it eats up my storage space. Thats
where the problem lies.

--riverman


"Yuji Sakuma" > wrote in message
.. .
> I am not a propeller head but it sounds to me like you have the virus
living
> in your machine and things won't improve until you clean it out. It
> happened to me too (thanks too w32/Swen.A). I thought about whether to
keep
> my installed software and files and disinfect or alternatively, to
reformat
> my hard drive. I had time so I opted to reformat and reinstall my
software
> and data files. I then subscribed to a firewall and virus protection
> service from my isp. I got along for over 10 years without such things
but
> it seems that they are now essential. This has reduced the junk mail to a
> trickle, so far at least.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Yuji Sakuma
>
> ================================================== =============
> "riverman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
> virus?
> > I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
> but
> > they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an
hourly
> > basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> > because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com
found
> > any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> > unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
> >
> > --riverman
> > (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)
> >
> >
>
>

[Osmo Jauhiainen]

"riverman" > wrote in message
...
> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?

Myron,

I have got lot of spam messages to my Yahoo mailbox but not a single one
of those microsoft update patch messages! Have you used your yahoo
mail address as reply address some time when sending messages to newsgroups?
I use Yahoo spam reporting tool for those spam messages and get now less
spam but anyway some messages including those damn Nigerian money offer
messages.

OsmoJ

[riverman]

"Osmo Jauhiainen" > wrote in message
...
>
> "riverman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
> virus?
> > I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
> but
> > they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an
hourly
> > basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> > because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com
found
> > any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> > unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
>
> Myron,
>
> I have got lot of spam messages to my Yahoo mailbox but not a single one
> of those microsoft update patch messages! Have you used your yahoo
> mail address as reply address some time when sending messages to
newsgroups?

Yeah, I put my correct address into a google search and got about 500 hits
(including replies to my posts). Unfortunately for a month back in 2001 it
was my return address while I was posting to another group. I don't know why
I had it in there...I think I got chastised for not being genuine, and
changed it, then got paranoid and changed it back.

I guess you can add Usenet to the list of things that last forever.

--riverman
)

[Jeff Taylor]

"riverman" > wrote in message
...
> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
>
> --riverman
> (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)
>

Riverman,

It has died out for me. For about two weeks I was getting hit hard, but over
the last couple it has slowed to a couple a day. Not sure why your account
would be hit more, maybe it's because yahoo is a more known provider with
many more users??

Jeff T.

[riverman]

"Jeff Taylor" > wrote in message
...
>
> "riverman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
> virus?
> > I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
> but
> > they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an
hourly
> > basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> > because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com
found
> > any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> > unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
> >
> > --riverman
> > (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)
> >
>
> Riverman,
>
> It has died out for me. For about two weeks I was getting hit hard, but
over
> the last couple it has slowed to a couple a day. Not sure why your account
> would be hit more, maybe it's because yahoo is a more known provider with
> many more users??

It might be because I'm somehow electronically 'farther' from the source? It
didn't even show up on my accounts until 2-3 days after some Roffians were
complaing of overload. I hope whatever die-down you are experiencing I will
see next week, then.

--riverman

[Yuji Sakuma]

I am not a computer expert. At the time that my machine got infected with
the worm, I checked around on Symantec's and McAfee's websites and talked to
tech support at my ISP and I got the impression that if a worm like Swen is
resident in a machine, it was not automatically removed by virus scans of
the time. It had to be removed manually by going in and fiddling with
registers in the operating system - Symantec had instructions posted on
their website on how to do this. At least that was the case then; virus
scanning software is constantly updated though and maybe the latest
incarnations do automatically remove Swen, I don't know.

Best regards,

Yuji Sakuma

================================================== ==================
"riverman" > wrote in message
...
> I don't think I have the virus in my drive, as I have been disinfecting it
> about twice a week. Has anyone seen my address as their source?
>
> OTOH, I do seem to be getting it mailed to me a lot since my real email
> somehow got onto the newsgroups, but I have a firewall that screens it out
> into my trash bin for Yahoo.com, where it eats up my storage space. Thats
> where the problem lies.
>
> --riverman
>
>

[Mark W. Oots]

There is a program (actually several versions already) that looks
specifically for the Swen.A and it's derivatives.When it's found, it stops
the process, deletes or cleans the infected registries, and eliminates the
program that started it all (the original "worm"). Norton had one for free a
couple weeks ago. BTW, if my machine is infected, it is sending emails, not
receiving them. I get between 15 and 30 per hour, based on who's online at
the time. (overnight, it's only about 15 or 20 in 15 hours.) A new version
does not require that an attachment be opened. It activates itself when
received. My fire wall stopped it by recognizing that it contained
executable code.

Mark

"Yuji Sakuma" > wrote in message
.. .
> I am not a computer expert. At the time that my machine got infected with
> the worm, I checked around on Symantec's and McAfee's websites and talked
to
> tech support at my ISP and I got the impression that if a worm like Swen
is
> resident in a machine, it was not automatically removed by virus scans of
> the time. It had to be removed manually by going in and fiddling with
> registers in the operating system - Symantec had instructions posted on
> their website on how to do this. At least that was the case then; virus
> scanning software is constantly updated though and maybe the latest
> incarnations do automatically remove Swen, I don't know.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Yuji Sakuma
>
> ================================================== ==================
> "riverman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I don't think I have the virus in my drive, as I have been disinfecting
it
> > about twice a week. Has anyone seen my address as their source?
> >
> > OTOH, I do seem to be getting it mailed to me a lot since my real email
> > somehow got onto the newsgroups, but I have a firewall that screens it
out
> > into my trash bin for Yahoo.com, where it eats up my storage space.
Thats
> > where the problem lies.
> >
> > --riverman
> >
> >
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/23/2003

[asadi]

No auto delete option?

john
"riverman" > wrote in message
...
> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
>
> --riverman
> (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)
>
>

[rw]

Mark W. Oots wrote:
>
> A new version
> does not require that an attachment be opened. It activates itself when
> received. My fire wall stopped it by recognizing that it contained
> executable code.

Microsoft's Windows "security" is a pathetic joke.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Stig Arne Bye]

riverman wrote:
>
> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted, but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?

Dying out? Well.....

I have so far received almost 4400 e-mail infected with the
W32.Swen.A@mm worm since 19th of September.

All incoming mail is automatically scanned by Norton AntiVirus(TM), and
after the infected attachment has been removed, the remaining headers
are moved to a special folder named "X-Virus". Previously, I wrote a
small program that count the headers (messages) in this folder and sort
them by virus/worm and generate a statistic. Therefore, here is my own
and latest W32.Swen.A@mm statistic showing that the average has been
constand around 150 per day:


E-mail infected by W32.Swen.A@mm (Worm.Automat.AHB)
================================================== =

Total count: 4374
Days received: 30
Average/day: 146

Date 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000
---------- ----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|
2003.09.19 #########| | | | | | | | | |
2003.09.20 ############################################### | | | | | |
2003.09.21 #######################################| | | | | | |
2003.09.22 ################################## | | | | | | |
2003.09.23 ############################################## | | | | | |
2003.09.24 ######################### | | | | | | | |
2003.09.25 ################# | | | | | | | | |
2003.09.26 ###### | | | | | | | | | |
2003.09.27 #########| | | | | | | | | |
2003.09.28 ########## | | | | | | | | |
2003.09.29 ################# | | | | | | | | |
2003.09.30 ################ | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.01 ################ | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.02 ############## | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.03 #########| | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.04 #########| | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.05 ######## | | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.06 ########## | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.07 ######## | | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.08 ########### | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.09 ########### | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.10 #########| | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.11 ######## | | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.12 ######## | | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.13 ####### | | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.14 ###### | | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.15 ########## | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.16 ################# | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.17 ############# | | | | | | | | |
2003.10.18 * #### | | | | | | | | | |
----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000

* Not accomplished (count updated as per 18.10.2003 at 02:44).


I don't have problems with full mail box as I have a 50 MB POP-account
disk qouta at my local ISP, and download (thus emptying the mail box)
several times per day.
OTOH, I do not use Microsoft programs for e-mail, and therefore cannot
be automatically infected by the Swen.A worm (that is programmed to use
a security hole in MS products) without explicit and manually opening
and executing the attachment.

Concerning the W32.Swen.A@mm worm in general, there are some things that
make this worm a little different from other mass-mailing worms (e.g.
Klez and Sobig.F):

1. The W32.Swen.A@mm worm does not only use address books on the
infected computer to collect e-mail adresses for sending itself to
other users, but also has a built-in NNTP-engine that makes the
worm capable to make an online connection with a news-server and
thus searching and collecting e-mail adresses directly from
newsgroup messages.

2. Although I haven't been able to verify this yet, it appear that the
"Reply-To"-address in the mail header is the real e-mail address of
the infected sender.
By manually examining the headers in the X-Virus folder (by opening
the mail box file in a regular text processor, e.g. WordPad), I
noticed that whenever receiving several infected e-mail from the
same user (identical IP-address appear in the originating
"Received"-line) with different "From" and "To" addresses (faked by
the W32.Swen.A@mm worm), the "Reply-To"-address was however
identical in all these, even if sent at different times.

One another "problem" with all these e-mails with viruses/worms as file
attachments is the online Internet cost.....

I use a dial-up modem connection (DSL is not available here yet) and pay
a per minute charge to the phone company for being connected.
I have found out that downloading and processing (scanning and removing
the attachment by Norton AntiVirus) each Swen.A infected e-mail takes
about 70 seconds in average.
With about 4,400 e-mail received, that makes a total of 308,000 seconds,
or roughly equal to 5,130 minutes.
Now, with a charge to the phone company of NOK 0.119 per minute, that
makes a total cost of approx. NOK 610 (equal to approx. US$ 80) only for
downloading all these infected e-mails.....



Stig Arne Bye

E-mail ......:
Contact .....: AOL IM: VT480TFE / MSN: / ICQ: 403349
Snail-Mail ..: P.O.Box 169, NO-9915 Kirkenes, Norway
Homepage ....: http://home.online.no/~stigbye/index.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Located just about 70°N 30°E - Almost at the top of the world!

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 18:42:59 +0100, "riverman" >
wrote:

>It might be because I'm somehow electronically 'farther' from the source? It
>didn't even show up on my accounts until 2-3 days after some Roffians were
>complaing of overload. I hope whatever die-down you are experiencing I will
>see next week, then.

For some reason it hit different people at slightly different times.
One couple had the wife laughing at how much the husband was swearing
until the next week when her turn came.

I'm down from 1500 or so a day to less than 400 or 500. Some days
only about 100. I bless my ISP for getting Postini, though I curse
the programming of their virus part when I have to click through it to
get to my regular SPAM.

If the last paragraph scared you, keep in mind that I've been on the
'Net and posting since '95 and didn't mung my address until the last
year. I'm on every SPAMmer record and seem to have a lot of careless
personal correspondents who wound up virus infected. Your mileage
will certainly vary.
--

rbc:vixen,Minnow Goddess,Willow Watcher,and all that sort of thing.
Often taunted by trout.
Only a fool would refuse to believe in luck. Only a damn fool would rely on it.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli

[Roger Ohlund]

So, riverman, this is why I got no response to the email telling you how to
complete the purchase of that Sami knife?
Still interested?

/Roger


"riverman" > wrote in message
...
> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
>
> --riverman
> (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)
>
>

[George Cleveland]

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 00:51:25 -0500, wrote:

>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 18:42:59 +0100, "riverman" >
>wrote:
>
>>It might be because I'm somehow electronically 'farther' from the source? It
>>didn't even show up on my accounts until 2-3 days after some Roffians were
>>complaing of overload. I hope whatever die-down you are experiencing I will
>>see next week, then.
>
>For some reason it hit different people at slightly different times.
>One couple had the wife laughing at how much the husband was swearing
>until the next week when her turn came.
>
>I'm down from 1500 or so a day to less than 400 or 500. Some days
>only about 100. I bless my ISP for getting Postini, though I curse
>the programming of their virus part when I have to click through it to
>get to my regular SPAM.
>
>If the last paragraph scared you, keep in mind that I've been on the
>'Net and posting since '95 and didn't mung my address until the last
>year. I'm on every SPAMmer record and seem to have a lot of careless
>personal correspondents who wound up virus infected. Your mileage
>will certainly vary.
>--
>
>rbc:vixen,Minnow Goddess,Willow Watcher,and all that sort of thing.
>Often taunted by trout.
>Only a fool would refuse to believe in luck. Only a damn fool would rely on it.
>
>http://www.visi.com/~cyli


I don't know if MSN (my ISP) did something but I went from getting dozens an
hour to nada in the last few weeks.

g.c.

[slenon]

mung test

--

----
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar
Save a cow, eat a PETA

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[riverman]

"asadi" > wrote in message
...
> No auto delete option?
>

No, it just sends it into the trash, which is also part of my storage quota.

--riverman

>

[riverman]

"Roger Ohlund" > wrote in message
...
> So, riverman, this is why I got no response to the email telling you how
to
> complete the purchase of that Sami knife?
> Still interested?
>
> /Roger
>


Umm, no, actually that was because I was getting ready to fly to Ghana and
was too busy/lazy to close the deal. Lets wait until next summer, when I'll
come with cash in hand and able to hold a few knives, OK?

--riverman

[riverman]

"rw" > wrote in message
. ..
> Mark W. Oots wrote:
> >
> > A new version
> > does not require that an attachment be opened. It activates itself when
> > received. My fire wall stopped it by recognizing that it contained
> > executable code.
>
> Microsoft's Windows "security" is a pathetic joke.
>

Yeah, but I hear they have a new security patch that they are emailing
everybody.

--riverman

[Bill Kiene]

Hi All,

I am not very "techy" and have been very active on the news groups and web
with fly fishing message boards so I was getting hundreds of crappy emails
daily that I just got a new email address.

I guess that is not the smartest thing but it worked for now.

--
Bill Kiene

Kiene's Fly Shop
Sacramento, CA
www.kiene.com

"riverman" > wrote in message
...

> So what have folks found out to do about this stupid Microsoft Patch
virus?
> I have my inbox filtered so that all the incoming messages get deleted,
but
> they just get sent to my trash where they still fill my quota on an hourly
> basis. I'm hearing from lots of folks that my mail is getting returned
> because this virus is cramming my box full. Have users of Yahoo.com found
> any way to protect themselves? I don't want to have to change addresses
> unless I have to. Does this thing show any signs of dying out?
>
> --riverman
> (don't bother sending a personal email reply..)
>
>

[Russell D.]

riverman wrote:

> "rw" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
>>Mark W. Oots wrote:
>> >
>>
>>>A new version
>>>does not require that an attachment be opened. It activates itself when
>>>received. My fire wall stopped it by recognizing that it contained
>>>executable code.
>>
>>Microsoft's Windows "security" is a pathetic joke.
>>
>
>
> Yeah, but I hear they have a new security patch that they are emailing
> everybody.
>
> --riverman
>
>

I'm pretty sure you are joking, Myron, but just to be sure (no smiley ya
know), Microsoft will never mail out a security patch. If you get an
email claiming to be from Microsoft with a patch attached you can be
sure it is a virus. To no open the attachment!

Russell

[Roger Ohlund]

"riverman" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Roger Ohlund" > wrote in message
> ...
> > So, riverman, this is why I got no response to the email telling you how
> to
> > complete the purchase of that Sami knife?
> > Still interested?
> >
> > /Roger
> >
>
>
> Umm, no, actually that was because I was getting ready to fly to Ghana and
> was too busy/lazy to close the deal. Lets wait until next summer, when
I'll
> come with cash in hand and able to hold a few knives, OK?
>
> --riverman


OK!

/Roger

[riverman]

"Russell D." > wrote in message
...
> riverman wrote:
>
> > "rw" > wrote in message
> > . ..
> >
> >>Mark W. Oots wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >>>A new version
> >>>does not require that an attachment be opened. It activates itself when
> >>>received. My fire wall stopped it by recognizing that it contained
> >>>executable code.
> >>
> >>Microsoft's Windows "security" is a pathetic joke.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Yeah, but I hear they have a new security patch that they are emailing
> > everybody.
> >
> > --riverman
> >
> >
>
> I'm pretty sure you are joking, Myron, but just to be sure (no smiley ya
> know), Microsoft will never mail out a security patch. If you get an
> email claiming to be from Microsoft with a patch attached you can be
> sure it is a virus. To no open the attachment!
>
>

Yeah, what he said. Except for that last sentence.

:-)

--riverman

[rw]

Bill Kiene wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am not very "techy" and have been very active on the news groups and web
> with fly fishing message boards so I was getting hundreds of crappy emails
> daily that I just got a new email address.
>
> I guess that is not the smartest thing but it worked for now.

Now that you're posting to ROFF with a valid email address, I predict
that you'll start getting those spams again soon.

BTW, Bill, I'll be in California in November and December. Maybe we can
get together for some striper fishing or something?

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[George Adams]

>From: "riverman"

>Yeah, but I hear they have a new security patch that they are emailing
>everybody.

Yes, and it works in a very clever way. It fills up your in box so it is
impossible for you to receive spam. <G>


George Adams

"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller

[Russell D.]

riverman wrote:

> "Russell D." > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>riverman wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"rw" > wrote in message
. ..
>>>
>>>
>>>>Mark W. Oots wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>A new version
>>>>>does not require that an attachment be opened. It activates itself when
>>>>>received. My fire wall stopped it by recognizing that it contained
>>>>>executable code.
>>>>
>>>>Microsoft's Windows "security" is a pathetic joke.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, but I hear they have a new security patch that they are emailing
>>>everybody.
>>>
>>>--riverman
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I'm pretty sure you are joking, Myron, but just to be sure (no smiley ya
>>know), Microsoft will never mail out a security patch. If you get an
>>email claiming to be from Microsoft with a patch attached you can be
>>sure it is a virus. To no open the attachment!
>>
>>
>
>
> Yeah, what he said. Except for that last sentence.
>
> :-)
>
> --riverman
>
>

Ah, come on, all or none! :-)

Russell

Who is often to lazy to proofread.

[riverman]

"Russell D." > wrote in message
...

> Russell
>
> Who is often to lazy to proofread.
>

LOL

--riverman

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:13:12 GMT, "slenon"
> wrote:

>mung test


Looks fine. Except it should be 'invalid' instead of 'nospam' at the
end. If it's got invalid when someone tries to send to you, it goes
to dev/null instead of your system trying to deliver it or bounce it,
either causing extra clogging on the 'Net.
--

rbc:vixen,Minnow Goddess,Willow Watcher,and all that sort of thing.
Often taunted by trout.
Only a fool would refuse to believe in luck. Only a damn fool would rely on it.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli

[slenon]

Noted. Thanks much.

----
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm