On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 05:25:19PM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
The Virus writer obviously went to some trouble to pick valid addresses.
It stands to reason that they expect that someone is getting mail to these
addresses. It also stands to reason that the abuser expects those persons
to get Virus notifications.
I don't think so; isn't it more likely the writer wants the infection to
spread, and the best chance for that is that the recipient sees a From:
address that they recognise and "trust", rather than
kerjregj(_at_)jsfjkh(_dot_)com,
so they look at the content where they otherwise would be wary?
I don't see a problem with notifications where the virus is known not to
forge the sender.
Tim