Can you plase pleaes stop this Virus Thread.
-jeremy
On Fri, 12 May 2000, Vernon Schryver wrote:
From: chris d koeberle <kodiak(_at_)flail(_dot_)com>
...
Indeed, I don't think any of the people who are complaining about the
"HTML in e-mail" issues would complain about someone sending an e-mail
with an HTML file as an attachment. At least, not as I understand their
arguments against it.
Just as with sending any active MIME attachment including binary UNIX
programs, it depends on the attached HTML file and who sent it.
As as been pointed out repeatedly and as demonstrated with a concrete
example Saturday morning, attached HTML can be a significant security
problem. I doubt that (probably porn) HTML spam was much of a security
threat, but if you think about it for a little, you can surely see how
such things can be real security problems.
The practice of sending both HTML and cleartext of supposedly the same
message reflects very poorly on those who do it intentionally and on those
who cause MUA's to trick others into doing it unintentionally. Never mind
the security issues, but consider only the wastes of disk space, CPU
processing, network bandwidth, and the inevitable differences between the
two versions. If the two messages were the same, then there would be no
excuse for sending both. If they differ, then one must be wrong, and
sending both is worse than a waste.
Vernon Schryver vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com