1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 07 May 2000	Volume 2000 : Issue 255       Contents: Re: boot tape can i make one?  C routines to access sysuaf  Re: C routines to access sysuaf  Re: C routines to access sysuaf  Re: C routines to access sysuaf  Re: C routines to access sysuaf  computer viruses on VMS  Re: Cool Stuff in stock $ DVD-ram and internet exporer support( Re: DVD-ram and internet exporer support' Re: Kind of portable Alpha, VMS capable  Re: Marketing opportunity & Menufinder - free tool for OpenVMS/VAX	 Re: OPCOM  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: the latest billybox virus  Re: VEST, last version... # Re: wich list: DIRECTORY limitation   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 11:06:52 +0200   From: Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch>& Subject: Re: boot tape can i make one?+ Message-ID: <VA.00000034.056d27fd@sture.ch>   < In article <3914732E.48FA46F9@gtech.com>, Arne Vajhj wrote:, > From: Arne Vajhj <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> > Newsgroups: comp.os.vms ( > Subject: Re: boot tape can i make one?' > Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 21:31:58 +0200  > To: paul@sture.ch  >  > Paul Sture wrote: J > > That used to be my first job after installing VMS. Remember to put theS > > standalone backup in [SYSE] on a system disk, as [SYSF] used to get used (still 9 > > does?) as a temporary boot root by some VMS upgrades.  > 6 > It is can be wise to also install it on a data-disk. > 5 > One of the occasions, where you need S/A is to boot 6 > to restore the system disk after a disk replacement.A > And the a stabackit on the system disk is not so usefull !  :-)  > O Very true. I used to put it on at least a couple of data disks, as well as the  Q system disk. I've used S/A in [SYS0] on data disks to minimize the complexity of   operator instructions too.   ___ 
 Paul Sture Switzerland    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 10:21:17 -0600 % From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com> $ Subject: C routines to access sysuafB Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000507102051.00a54100@pop.clsp.uswest.net>  A Anybody have a handy C routine to access sysuaf record-by-record?    ------I +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ I | Dan O'Reilly                  |                                       | I | Principal Engineer            |  "Time flies like an arrow.  Fruit    | I | Process Software Corporation  |   flies like a banana."               | I | http://www.process.com        |                    -- Groucho Marx    | I +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 11:56:52 -0500 , From: Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com>( Subject: Re: C routines to access sysuaf> Message-ID: <hshubs-EA19D2.11565207052000@news.mindspring.com>  G In article <4.2.0.58.20000507102051.00a54100@pop.clsp.uswest.net>, Dan  " O'Reilly <dano@process.com> wrote:  B >Anybody have a handy C routine to access sysuaf record-by-record?   Have you tried SYS$GETUAI()? --  ; Howard S Shubs      hshubs@mindspring.com    hshubs@bix.com ? The Denim Adept     Which is better, Maryann or pickled Ginger? > SPAM: uce@ftc.gov   postmaster@[127.0.0.1]   abuse@[127.0.0.1]   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 11:20:45 -0600 % From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com> ( Subject: Re: C routines to access sysuafB Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000507111951.00b19620@pop.clsp.uswest.net>  * At 10:56 AM 5/7/00 , Howard S Shubs wrote:G >In article <4.2.0.58.20000507102051.00a54100@pop.clsp.uswest.net>, Dan # >O'Reilly <dano@process.com> wrote:  > D > >Anybody have a handy C routine to access sysuaf record-by-record? >  >Have you tried SYS$GETUAI()?  >-- < >Howard S Shubs      hshubs@mindspring.com    hshubs@bix.com@ >The Denim Adept     Which is better, Maryann or pickled Ginger?? >SPAM: uce@ftc.gov   postmaster@[127.0.0.1]   abuse@[127.0.0.1]   & Getuai can't have a wildcard username.   ------I +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ I | Dan O'Reilly                  |                                       | I | Principal Engineer            |  "Time flies like an arrow.  Fruit    | I | Process Software Corporation  |   flies like a banana."               | I | http://www.process.com        |                    -- Groucho Marx    | I +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 18:54:13 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> ( Subject: Re: C routines to access sysuaf) Message-ID: <39159FB5.521B452F@gtech.com>    Dan O'Reilly wrote: C > Anybody have a handy C routine to access sysuaf record-by-record?    See:  0 ftp://ftp.hhs.dk/pub/vms/utilities/utilities.zip: http://www.hhs.dk/anonymos/pub/vms/utilities/utilities.zip   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 13:39:05 -0400 " From: Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org>( Subject: Re: C routines to access sysuaf8 Message-ID: <4.3.1.0.20000507132422.01cc85a0@24.8.96.48>  - At 11:20 AM 5/7/00 -0600, Dan O'Reilly wrote:   + >At 10:56 AM 5/7/00 , Howard S Shubs wrote: H >>In article <4.2.0.58.20000507102051.00a54100@pop.clsp.uswest.net>, Dan$ >>O'Reilly <dano@process.com> wrote: >>E >> >Anybody have a handy C routine to access sysuaf record-by-record?  >> >>Have you tried SYS$GETUAI()? > ' >Getuai can't have a wildcard username.   H You ought to be able to open() the sysuaf, whip through it with read(), K which respects record boundaries, and yank out the user names. You'll need  L the layout of the file to know where the username is. (Dunno the layout off L hand, unfortunately, but I know it's in the newsgroup archives somewhere...)   					Dan  I --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- 2 Dan Sugalski                          even samurai? dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even ;                                       teddy bears get drunk    ------------------------------   Date: 07 May 2000 16:47:28 GMT# From: merefbast@aol.com (MerefBast)   Subject: computer viruses on VMS: Message-ID: <20000507124728.25509.00001760@ng-df1.aol.com>  L    Hi. I am looking for information to compare the susceptibility of various& operating systems to computer viruses.  O    I am particularly interested in references for factual information about the L kinds, nature, and number of security holes, as well as the number of actual< viruses, worms, and Trojan Horses for each operating system.  I    A copy of the information to <MerefBast@aol.com> would be appreciated.   
    Thanks....    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 18:58:56 +0200 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>   Subject: Re: Cool Stuff in stock) Message-ID: <3915A0D0.D1134337@gtech.com>    "Terry C. Shannon" wrote: 2 > "Mark Tarka" <markZERO@mcn.net> wrote in message > news:39150BF8.F9C@mcn.net... > > David Turner wrote: ) > > > Alpha Personal Workstation 500a (u) ' > > > 500Mhz CPU + Latest SRM and ABios  > > > 2mb Cache  > > > Floppy 1.44mb  > > > 512mb memory  > > > Qlogic SCSI Ultra Wide PCI0 > > > IC-KZPAA-AA SCSI-2 ctr for tape and CD-ROM! > > > ELSA Gloria Synergy 8mb PCI  > > > 10/100 Ethernet (21140)  > > > Sound Daughter card (ESS) # > > > 2 x 4.5Gb 7200rpm disk drives ! > > > Keyboard and 3-Button Mouse  > > > NEW VMS License  > > > ) > > > USD3200  or USD2200 without license  > > / > > What is this stuff?  Can an idiot get it up  > > and running? > K > Well, I managed to get a Personal Workstation 433a up and running with no  > problem whatsoever.  > M > The price looks fairly good. List price for 512MB config with two disks and H > a graphics card was, IIRC, pretty close to $10K. $1K for a new OpenVMSM > license is (sad but true) a pretty good deal. Of course, if you plan to use N > the system for noncommercial purposes, you could go with an OpenVMS HobbyistM > License (free, contact the DFWCUG for more information) or Tru64 Technology  > Enthusiast License ($99).   H I may add that I twice has bougth items from islanco and Dave Turner andG are a happy customer. The price was rigth and items arrived on time and  in perfect condition   Arne   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 10:09:48 GMT  From: roer@xs4all.nl- Subject: DVD-ram and internet exporer support - Message-ID: <39153fdc.5568275@news.xs4all.nl>   D Does anybody know where I can find information about DVD-rom and ram; support for OpenVMS? (supported configuration, driver etc.) F The same question for the internet exporer support for my Alphastation
 with OpenVMS.    Thanks.    Philip Leenman   Please reply to pleenman@tci.nl      TCI Technologies BV 
 Zoetermeer The Netherlands    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 15:07:41 GMT  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>1 Subject: Re: DVD-ram and internet exporer support ' Message-ID: <391586BB.83213CF4@home.nl>    roer@xs4all.nl wrote:  > F > Does anybody know where I can find information about DVD-rom and ram= > support for OpenVMS? (supported configuration, driver etc.)   A There will be (or already is ?) DVD Rom support AFAIK. DVD Ram is H another matter since there isn't even official CD-R/RW support in VMS as yet.  H > The same question for the internet exporer support for my Alphastation > with OpenVMS.   H Ask Uncle Bill, but most likely never. But you will get Netscape V6 in aG couple of months, early beta versions can be downloaded (Mozzila M15 16  ? ).   > 	 > Thanks.  >  > Philip Leenman > ! > Please reply to pleenman@tci.nl  >  > TCI Technologies BV  > Zoetermeer > The Netherlands    ------------------------------   Date: 7 May 2000 08:08:11 CDT = From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.302774.killspam.0140 (Wayne Sewell) 0 Subject: Re: Kind of portable Alpha, VMS capable. Message-ID: <oMICKujZPHcE@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  \ In article <882568D8.0012DD86.00@WHDOM99.HEALTHNET.COM>, Shane.F.Smith@healthnet.com writes:0 > From: Shane F Smith@FHS on 05/06/2000 08:25 PM >  >  > To:   Info-Vax@mvb.saic.com  > cc: / > Subject:  Kind of portable Alpha, VMS capable  > P > With all the discussion about the old Tadpole Alphabook recently, I was ratherH > surprised to find what appears to be another portable Alpha with newer. > technology. It's at the bottom of this page: > 3 >      http://www.novaglobal.com.sg/alphastorm.html  > M > I don't know anything more that what's on the website, and I don't know the O > company at all, but it claims to be portable and completely binary compatible 1 > with Compaq Alphaservers. I don't see a price,    M Unfortunately, it will probably have the same exorbitant pricing.  I could be % pleasantly surprised, but I doubt it.     " >and I get the impression it's not2 > battery powered but a carry in, plug in device.   N Well, I could live with that.  As I said in an earlier post, I can hold off onL computing on the plane and can wait until I get to the hotel room.  Besides,M given the low battery capacity of the alphabook, it's essentially a carry in,  plug in device also.  :-)   M This one is a little big for that type of thing anyway, with a 15-inch screen M and what appears to be a full keyboard.  It's definitely not a laptop, unless 3 the lap belongs to the fat lady at the circus.  :-)     ! >Looks really interesting though.  > Here's some details: > ? >      Compaq Alpha 21164 ev56 CPU at 533MHz, 600MHz, or 667MHz = >      2MB (533MHz) or 4MB (600MHz, 667MHz) external L3 cache ( >      128MB ECC SDRAM expandable to 1GB. >      Built-in 15-inch TFT Display (1024x768) >      1.06B/s Memory Bandwith0 >      2 64-bit and 2 32-bit PCI and 2 ISA slots$ >      2 Serial and 1 Parallel ports* >      Choice of various operating systems >      either AlphaBIOS (Linux) + >      or Compaq SRM Console (UNIX and VMS) *                                        ^^^  N This is significant in itself.  You don't see many third-party alphas that can run vms.   Wayne    --  O =============================================================================== M Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxx : http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-) O =============================================================================== C Jake Blues: "Sell me your children!  How much for the little girl?"    ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 00:48:59 -0700* From: "Nikita V. Belenki" <kit@nospam.net>" Subject: Re: Marketing opportunity< Message-ID: <Ni9R4.17519$jZ3.230987@nuq-read.news.verio.net>  0 "John Vottero" <John@MVPSI.com> wrote in message> news:C15945A9D9EFCF11BA8B08002BBF1CCC0CD6DE@berry.mvpsi.com...  F > > > >   - the mail program running code when the user clicking on an > > > > attachment > > > >     containing code I > > > > No secure OS and mail program would do anything so stupid. The MS  > > > > software do.J > Do you really think you add security by telling people that they have to7 > extract the attachment and open it in another window?   K We do really think that we do add security by telling people that they have F to make more steps to run the potentially harmful code attached to the= letter than to view the document attached to the same letter.   J > It is a combination of very useful features.  Don't we all wish that VMS had B > better MIME support?  Isn't a callable interface to mail useful?  C It doesn't matter. There should be no way in the properly organized 7 communication system to disguise trojan code as *data*.    Kit. kit # kits.net   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 14:36:57 GMT  From: micbas@my-deja.com/ Subject: Menufinder - free tool for OpenVMS/VAX ) Message-ID: <8f3v28$er1$1@nnrp1.deja.com>   F I am pleased to introduce our super-tested utility for menu generation under OpenVMS/VAX   .                     MenuFinder for OpenVMS/VAX 1. What Is MenuFinder  2. Main Characteristics - 3. MenuFinder is free for OpenVMS/VAX systems  4. How to install MenuFinder     1. What Is MenuFinder   C   MenuFinder is a menu generator for OpenVMS systems (VAX and AXP). B   It has been created to give a simple but effective answer to theB   requirement of presenting the user with a set of functions via a   menu interface. 5   In particular, MenuFinder is an ideal instrument to >   - build on-line guides for the users of the computing centre<   - document and utilise management procedures of the system     manager or the operator.     1. Main Characteristics    Types of option in the menusA   DCL commands, text files, data files, programs, batch files and .   submenus can be associated with the options.  / Association of programmes or commands to files. :   For example, the program used to write a document can beB   associated with the letter: choosing the document from the menu,7   activates that program to read or write the document.    Help text on the menu options A   A user may have to use many programs, although infrequently: it @   is not easy therefore, to remember even the simplest functions?   of a product. Often, shortcuts and contrivances are forgotten A   after a while. MenuFinder allows the possibility to associate a @   help text with each option of a menu, in which can be inserted;   instructions, annotations and useful indications both for    oneself and other users.  ; The means of accessing the menus are particularly powerful. ?   Apart from being able to use the classic hierarchical submenu A   structure, it is also possible to jump from one menu to another >   specifying its name or supplying one or more words to search(   for in the description of the options.?   This capability is available not only from within MenuFinder, '   but also from the OpenVMS prompt ($).    The navigation liney<   Records the last 10 menus called-up, allowing an extremely   rapid means to recall them.   " Rapid return to the last used menu7   In case it is necessary to exit MenuFinder and returnn?   completely under the control of OpenVMS, it is still possiblev+   to recall immediately the last menu used.-   It's simple to construct a menue@   MenuFinder is an easy to use product: it is sufficient to know?   a few DCL commands, be able to use EDIT, the standard OpenVMSl9   editor and know the few (10 or so) instructions for the 9   generation of the menus. The construction  of a menu isi=   interactive and every change has an immediate effect on thei	   screen.h  
 Logical Names :   The use of Logical Names both for the personalization ofA   MenuFinder and for the definition of logical directories, makes C   the management of the product extremely flexible and particularly %   suitable for a cluster environment.h    - 3. MenuFinder is free for OpenVMS/VAX systems   7   No licence fees are required for installing and using-   MenuFinder for OpenVMS/VAX.-(   You can use it free of charge forever.:   The Menufinder VAX version is time unlimited and without:   any functionality reduction compared to the AXP version.  , 4. How to install MenuFinder for OpenVMS/VAX  A   Visit the site http://www.itre.com/mf/download.html to downloade8   the OpenVMS/VAX installation kit and the documentation   Michele Bassan i3 Italian Internet Information2 Vigonza (PD) Italy
 mb@itre.co    & Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.j   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 11:06:59 +0200E  From: Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> Subject: Re: OPCOM+ Message-ID: <VA.00000035.056d40e9@sture.ch>   F In article <sh8b9s6voju91@corp.supernews.com>, John E. Malmberg wrote:+ > From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.net>S > Newsgroups: comp.os.vmse > Subject: Re: OPCOM& > Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 09:38:39 -0500 > - > Paul Sture <paul#sture.ch> wrote in message ' > news:VA.00000032.1a234ddd@sture.ch...  > L > > This was IMHO a bug introduced in VMS V6.2. A comparison of the V6.1 and > V6.2 startup filesL > > revealed that under V6.1 the Alpha and VAX versions were different (IIRC > one of the files called-N > > by startup.com), and in V6.2 someone had (laudably) "corrected" this, with > the result that bothJ > > VAX and Alpha versions became identical. Please note that I spent some > considerable time L > > researching this back in 1996 when I first upgraded to V6.2 and ended up > using the "brute force"-, > > method I outlined in my post to Bernard. > >aN > > Unfortunately, this resulted in the behavior where an Alpha might think it > was a workstation and  > > not create the logfile.F > C > The BUG that I remember and reported to the CSC resulted from the J > installation of a prior version of DECWindows-Motif changed a table that > Autogen used.- > E > It incorrectly caused AUTOGEN to set all non-workstation systems as-G > workstation, and thus it shut off autogen.  Specifically the value ofrN > WINDOW_SYSTEM was set to 1 always.  The only fix to get opcom working was to, > force WINDOW_SYSTEM to 0 in MODPARAMS.DAT. > 6 > This is fixed with DECWindows Motif 1.2.4 and later. > F That could explain what I was seeing under VMS 6.2 - Motif 1.2.3 IIRC. > K > On an Alpha Workstation, I have not had any problems with Opcom messages,t@ > the only thing is that an Operator Window needs to be enabled. > F But the cluster had this on last week doesn't have graphics consoles. 6 Unfortunately it's not a cluster I can reboot at will.  N > Enabling the Operator Window is done by making sure the following line is inM > the file SYS$COMMON:[SYSMGR]DECW$PRIVATE_APPS_SETUP.COM for the workstationo( > that you want to the operator console. > $ > $decw$console_selection = "WINDOW" > K > If the workstation is in a cluster, and you want the opcom to work on it,1< > the following logical names should be defined from running > SYS$MANAGER:SYLOGICALS.COM > * > $define/system/exec opc$opa0_enable TRUE- > $define/system/exec opc$logfile_enable TRUE- > L The second line is there, but as I reported, it still doesn't work on every O configuration. I supposed I'd better do a little more digging... But the first @L line should have avoided the "no operator available problem". I'll try that  too. > J > This is documented in the associated template files and in other places. > L > I would also recommend verifying that the system is tuned for the specificM > graphics adapter present.  Some graphics adapters need specific settings inoM > MODPARAMS.DAT and in DECW$PRIVATE_SERVER_SETUP.COM.  These settings will beo8 > in the manuals and release notes for DECWindows MOTIF. > K > I have not worked with the CDE mode of Motif, only the classic DECWindows- > Motif. >    ___-
 Paul Sture Switzerlanda   ------------------------------   Date: 7 May 2000 06:05:40 GMTv# From: system@niuhep.physics.niu.eduu& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus+ Message-ID: <8f313k$2t2$1@husk.cso.niu.edu>o  ) "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:e- >Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com> wrotet* >>"Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote:  H >> >And as long as you do it only to yourself, you have only yourself to
 >> >blame.  C >> Since it was done by files from someone else, did they did it toi >> themselves?9 >> Or was it done by someone else and fascilitated by MS?3  J >In every individual instance, it was done by the person who clicked on an< >attachment without having a clue that it was safe to do so   B It was sent to them by an acquaintance.  Sounds like a clue to me.   >- despite theL >explicit warning "Some files can contain viruses or otherwise be harmful toG >your computer.  It is important to be certain that this file is from a'E >trustworthy source." in the dialog box that asks whether to save thea >attachment to disk or open it.   M And when the file comes from a trustworth source?  As it almost always did...   J >MS indeed facilitated this, though IMO provided reasonable - and timely -I >warning (see above; if the warning had appeared only in documentation, I G >might be a bit less forgiving).  So did the computer manufacturer, the-M >telephone company (assuming a dial-up connection), and the power company, to  >name only a few.   J >> >Protecting people from themselves is usually not a good idea:  they'llK >> >often find a way around it anyway, but it remains a pain in the ass for8F >> >everyone else who didn't need the protection in the first place.    - Basic security is needed by almost everybody.n  I >> In general, the Right Thing is to perform tasks with the lowest accessbK >> possible, in order to prevent havoc which could happen at higher levels.r  < >BeOS is an example of a largely single-user system that mayK >have multi-user protection, but then again it's only a couple of years old G >rather than the decades-old single-user bases from which Win9x and Mac  >spring.  C And hear I thought Win95 had nothing to do with DOS, are you saying F it is so tied into DOS and playing games that they couldn't put decent security into the OS?8  < >> >But a lot of people here would rather believe that theirM >> >feature-impoverished environment is somehow superior to one that provides"L >> >both the means to shoot yourself in the foot and the mechanisms to avoidI >> >it, in a manner that makes common usage easy for non-technical users.5  4 And makes safe, reasonable usage a complete mystery.  J >I can't detect any defensive feelings on my part, but it's certainly true3 >that the point is being missed (though not by me).  >RM >The thread began with the statement "if these people would run real computero2 >systems, shit like this wouldn't happen to them."  F My understanding is that wordperfect is designed in such a way not to  allow macro viruses.  . [snip on how bad VMS is as a consumer product]  E Lack of convenience and relative market share strike me as irrelavent / to the question of whether MS ships a lousy OS.   H If companies and gov'ts are satisfied with buying a OS that is designed / to run games, well, they get what they pay for.p   Robert   Morphis@physics.niu.edu$8 Real Women change tires			abuse@uu.net postmaster@uu.net7 Real Men change diapers                 security@uu.nety   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 03:07:29 -0400' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>e& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus( Message-ID: <8f34jt$i95$1@pyrite.mv.net>  0 <system@niuhep.physics.niu.edu> wrote in message% news:8f313k$2t2$1@husk.cso.niu.edu... + > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:p/ > >Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com> wrote-, > >>"Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote: > J > >> >And as long as you do it only to yourself, you have only yourself to > >> >blame. >5E > >> Since it was done by files from someone else, did they did it ton > >> themselves?; > >> Or was it done by someone else and fascilitated by MS?t > L > >In every individual instance, it was done by the person who clicked on an= > >attachment without having a clue that it was safe to do soe >nD > It was sent to them by an acquaintance.  Sounds like a clue to me. >- > >- despite theK > >explicit warning "Some files can contain viruses or otherwise be harmful> toI > >your computer.  It is important to be certain that this file is from a1G > >trustworthy source." in the dialog box that asks whether to save the ! > >attachment to disk or open it.a >rH > And when the file comes from a trustworth source?  As it almost always did...  C Are you truly clueless, or just blinded by your own preconceptions?s  I The file *never* came from a trustworthy source, whether you consider theqK source to be the worm itself or the incompetent user who activated it.  And L especially given the Melissa brouhaha last year, that distinction is not all= that an unreasonable one to expect a user to be able to make.a  K 'Certainty' is not a relative term - and this worm made only minor attemptslI to masquerade as a truly personalized message.  It may be an argument for J better user education (like, don't click on an attachment unless you get aL recognizably-personal message from a source you know indicating that they inF fact meant to send it - though that's exactly what Melissa should have8 taught people), but it's not an indictment of Microsoft.  F Get it through your thick skulls that people *are* going to send emailK attachments to each other, whether you happen to approve of the practice or:K not:  it's convenient, and they're used to it.  Microsoft made a reasonablehK effort to help them stay out of trouble when doing so, and the fact that itaF underestimated user stupidity is not something which in some way makesB Microsoft culpable for that stupidity.  Perhaps it will now add anJ additional dialog box that appears for only executable attachments (one ofI the other posts claims that such an additional box already exists, but ittL didn't appear when I ran an informal test just now on Win98):  that wouldn'tJ be too much of an imposition, given the relative infrequency of executableH attachments and the fact that it takes only one additional click to pass through the box.   >eL > >MS indeed facilitated this, though IMO provided reasonable - and timely -K > >warning (see above; if the warning had appeared only in documentation, I I > >might be a bit less forgiving).  So did the computer manufacturer, the L > >telephone company (assuming a dial-up connection), and the power company, to > >name only a few.r >aL > >> >Protecting people from themselves is usually not a good idea:  they'llI > >> >often find a way around it anyway, but it remains a pain in the asst for F > >> >everyone else who didn't need the protection in the first place. > / > Basic security is needed by almost everybody.a  8 As is the freedom to opt out of security you don't want.   > K > >> In general, the Right Thing is to perform tasks with the lowest accessBE > >> possible, in order to prevent havoc which could happen at higher  levels.6 >i> > >BeOS is an example of a largely single-user system that mayI > >have multi-user protection, but then again it's only a couple of yearsO oldnI > >rather than the decades-old single-user bases from which Win9x and Mac 
 > >spring. >^E > And hear I thought Win95 had nothing to do with DOS, are you sayingpH > it is so tied into DOS and playing games that they couldn't put decent > security into the OS?=  J Sorry, I'm not interested in educating you.  But there are books you could! read that describe the evolution.w   >y> > >> >But a lot of people here would rather believe that theirF > >> >feature-impoverished environment is somehow superior to one that providesH > >> >both the means to shoot yourself in the foot and the mechanisms to avoiduK > >> >it, in a manner that makes common usage easy for non-technical users.- > 6 > And makes safe, reasonable usage a complete mystery.  L Not really.  The problem was mostly one of ignorance and/or inattention, notK complexity.  Use of the Internet is still in its infancy, and there'll be a I lot more snafus before it becomes routine to most of the population.  ButoK both competence and protective aids (rather than restrictions) will improven7 over time, just as they did with use of the automobile.    >sL > >I can't detect any defensive feelings on my part, but it's certainly true5 > >that the point is being missed (though not by me).n > >pF > >The thread began with the statement "if these people would run real computer4 > >systems, shit like this wouldn't happen to them." >pG > My understanding is that wordperfect is designed in such a way not toe > allow macro viruses.  G An observation which even if true has absolutely nothing to do with thenI discussion of Microsoft's email implementation or the question of whetherMH certain features should be available:  it's rather a question of exactlyJ *how* a given feature is implemented, and there's certainly some reason toI suspect that in the case of Word macros that implementation may have been-; unfortunate (though not being a Word user I wouldn't know).r   >i0 > [snip on how bad VMS is as a consumer product] > G > Lack of convenience and relative market share strike me as irrelaventt1 > to the question of whether MS ships a lousy OS.a  K And this entire discussion is also irrelevant to the question of whether MSWJ ships a lousy OS, since it has exposed no deficiencies in either the OS orL the email application that runs on it.  At worst Microsoft may be consideredI to have shipped its software with less than optimal default settings - anh+ experience VMS has had in its past as well.e   >eI > If companies and gov'ts are satisfied with buying a OS that is designeda1 > to run games, well, they get what they pay for.s  K And VMS gets the popularity it deserves.  Neither situation is optimal, butn1 nothing said in this discussion is going to help.d   - bill   >t > Robert >e > Morphis@physics.niu.eduM8 > Real Women change tires abuse@uu.net postmaster@uu.net9 > Real Men change diapers                 security@uu.netn   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 11:07:00 +0200m  From: Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch>& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus+ Message-ID: <VA.00000036.056d44c9@sture.ch>h  F In article <sh88p9u5oju67@corp.supernews.com>, John E. Malmberg wrote:+ > From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.net>p > Newsgroups: comp.os.vmso( > Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus& > Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 08:55:42 -0500 > - > Paul Sture <paul#sture.ch> wrote in messagee' > news:VA.00000033.1a235297@sture.ch...e= > > In article <8evm6i$ei5$1@pyrite.mv.net>, Bill Todd wrote:i- > > > From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd#foo.mv.com>  > >iL > > > application (yeah, Word macro viruses might sneak through that filter, > butn@ > > > they're an issue to be dealt with in Word rather than in a > general-purpose  > > > mechanism).g > > >oN > > On my setup at work, Word and Excel both pop up a fairly dire warning is aN > > file being opened contain macros, and offers the option to disable macros. > ItA > > certainly makes me think before blindly saying yes, go ahead.s > I > I see that warning sometimes when the file does not seem to contain anyt( > macros.  I wonder what it is checking? > N > The problem with Outlook/Explorer is that under certain conditions they willL > execute these macros with out asking, automatically as soon as the message > is opened. > M Yes indeed. As I pointed out yesterday, the Preview Pane is on by default in mJ various (all?) versions of Outlook. The Preview Pane of course is looking @ inside the mail and presumably has the ability to execute stuff. ___o
 Paul Sture SwitzerlandI   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 12:59:50 GMTn= From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)e& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus0 Message-ID: <009E9B8B.10FC58FB@SendSpamHere.ORG>  g In article <gOJ49EHUJxj1@eisner.decus.org>, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes: q >In article <009E9B08.336F6BF0@SendSpamHere.ORG>, system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) writes:r >cK >> monopoly$chlock crap is already infiltrating VMS.  If we're not careful  J >> and we don't yell loudly enough, the next thing to be incorporated justI >> might be one of these REALLY STUPID monopoly$chlock features.  Then, IvJ >> ask, where will we be?  "pissing and moaning" here, I would hope, would8 >> send a signal that we won't/don't tolerate such crap. >V: >I am not convinced Microsoft errors are infiltrating VMS.5 >Certainly the Lanman networking support in Pathworksd7 >suffers from the insecurities of the Microsoft design, 7 >but nobody is pushing it for VMS-to-VMS communication.a >j8 >As for the Registry, the DECUS talks claimed that their7 >goal was to build a Registry that was more robust than07 >on NT, but that they still were not going to depend onM >it for booting VMS.   Right Larry,  E If DECompaq wishes to provide some monopoly$chlock feature on VMS forrD the pirposes of supporting an application for a monopoly$chlock likeF environment, so be it.  I will not, however, tolerate the short-sight-D ed monopoly$chlock-like features if they will break my system's sec-E urity or encumber my doing things in a sound VMS-like manner.  I sus-M pect others feel the same way.   --N VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001           VAXman@TMESIS.COM  L GNU Freeware -- What does the GNU *really* stand for?  Garbage!  Not Usable!   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 13:22:59 GMT  From: wetboy <wetboy@shore.net>d& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus. Message-ID: <T6eR4.69$w%.10276@news.shore.net>  + Keith Brown <kbrown780@usfamily.net> wrote:  < snip >= : Geez Bill, are we bitter? BTW, Netscape on OpenVMS seems torB : handle attachments just fine on my system. I think Wayne is just= : expressing what may of us think, While the world wrings itst? : hands about how computer systems all over the world have beenSA : trashed by the latest virus, somehow only us ignorant dinosaursw; : manage to keep our computers running. We must be ignorantr1 : dinosaurs, right, because we don't run Windows.s  ; If a Model T suits you, that's fine, but personally, I likec= my automatic starter, automatic transmission, power steering,n; A/C, car stereo, etc, etc, etc.  How many people do you see0= driving around in Model T's?  The current mindset around VMS .: forecloses it from being little other than a museum piece.; And if you don't want it to be that way, then one thing VMS,9 developers could do, for example, is to figure out how ton; handle e-mail attachments in a better, more secure, way --  8 instead of standing on the sidelines and sniping at the / imperfections in the progress others have made.c  	 -- Wetboyw   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 13:32:54 GMTn= From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)E& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus0 Message-ID: <009E9B8F.AF736EB2@SendSpamHere.ORG>  R In article <8f2va9$bt0$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:  L >Funny thing, though:  adults tend to like to make decisions for themselves,F >regardless of the opinions of elitists (I was tempted to say 'elitistL >assholes', but that wouldn't be polite) who might wish otherwise.  And they' >buy products that allow them to do so.'  J Hmm.  That's ironic as it's adults (at least by definition, citizens of 18J years of age or older) that have elected our present US federal "you can't= think for yourself so we'll do it for you" politcal regime.  s  I >Ever?  And *could* you if you had a need to?  There's a large differencer> >between *choosing* not to and being prohibited from doing so.  ( Try choosing NOT to pay your income tax.  ? >VMS users can be justifiably grateful that they were spared anTJ >unpleasantness that many were not.  But to legitimately boast about VMS'sJ >superiority in this area, VMS would have to support all the features thatJ >the Great Unwashed have grown to like in more popular email systems *and*L >retain its vaunted strengths (which of course are very real, but just don'tI >seem to outweigh its 'strangeness' in most real-world sales situations).8 >3K >As long as the demands for VMS enhancements come mostly from a user familywJ >tree that by and large does not fork (so to speak), such overall-superiorG >facilities in email (or other areas) don't seem likely to appear:  theyK >people who use VMS have mostly done so forever, are largely happy with it,dJ >just want more of the same, and aren't inclined to press for the kinds ofM >enhancements that might make it attractive to the people who *don't* alreadyw5 >use it but might if they found it more approachable.t > K >So every once in a while, when I see one of the more egregious examples ofcL >VMS bigotry pop up, I lob a grenade into the discussion just to see whetherM >there's *anyone* around here not already too ossified in their beliefs to beaE >able to think a bit outside their conventional box.  But I'm usuallyk >disappointed.  J You've labeled it bigotry but it could be mere common sense!  A great manyK of us here have used VMS since its inception.  A great many used other sys-tJ tems prior to that.  A microcosm of this group was likely using the inter-H net (ARPAnet, MILnet, etc.) while Bill was still failing his way throughH Harvard or prior to the commercialization of the internet.  Mail was forI messages and FTP used for file transfers.  I have nothing against the use>I of MIME features in mail.  HTTP links embedded in a document... great!  I>I would prefer to be able to elect to download an image or an executable or H a script than to have it unwittingly thrust upon me and/or my systems in an attachment.    G ... and as for the argument that the general population is TOO IGNORANTmH to learn a computer and thus, needs these stupid features ... well, I doG not buy into that.  The weather just turned hot here where I reside andnG the old thermostat was not properly functioning to cycle the air condi-sG tioner.  Time to buy a new thermostat.  Have you look recently at thesesH things?  These things have more programmable features -- buttons, menus,G etc. -- than your beloved O/S authored by the Redmond league of misfit gG programmers.  Everywhere you look today, we're bombarded with new high-oH tech gizmos and I have to assume there's a market for them or they wouldH not be offered to te public.  I'm tired of the argument that the generalH public is too stupid to use a computer that bgInc. has to add all of the$ mind-numbing, dumbing-down features.     --N VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001           VAXman@TMESIS.COM  L GNU Freeware -- What does the GNU *really* stand for?  Garbage!  Not Usable!   ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 07:51:07 -0600 (MDT)e) From: John Nebel <nebel@athena.csdco.com>o& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virusG Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0005070737120.27616-100000@athena.csdco.com>a   Hiya,t  F I must be using a different VMS from you.  It appears to handle e-mailH attachments just fine using either POP3 or IMAP.  Can even move messages@ and folders around from machine to machine and across dissimilar' operating systems with point and click.S  G Gee, I could even map drives from jpg-loaded web sites on both Unix andeF VMS to this here NT box signed in as network administrator and fire upF Outlook and execute the ILOVEYOU vbs script if I wanted to demonstrate1 destructive stupidity compatibility with Windows.7  
 John Nebel  ! On Sun, 7 May 2000, wetboy wrote:d   > = > If a Model T suits you, that's fine, but personally, I like8? > my automatic starter, automatic transmission, power steering,t= > A/C, car stereo, etc, etc, etc.  How many people do you seeo? > driving around in Model T's?  The current mindset around VMS d< > forecloses it from being little other than a museum piece.= > And if you don't want it to be that way, then one thing VMSv; > developers could do, for example, is to figure out how tob= > handle e-mail attachments in a better, more secure, way -- ?: > instead of standing on the sidelines and sniping at the 1 > imperfections in the progress others have made.e >  > -- Wetboyo >    ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 09:46:43 -0500) From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.net>n& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus/ Message-ID: <shb03g3hqil126@corp.supernews.com>   + Paul Sture <paul#sture.ch> wrote in message % news:VA.00000036.056d44c9@sture.ch...c > >nK > Yes indeed. As I pointed out yesterday, the Preview Pane is on by defaultk inK > various (all?) versions of Outlook. The Preview Pane of course is lookinglB > inside the mail and presumably has the ability to execute stuff.  H It is only the most recent versions of Outlook and friends that have the% ability to disable the preview plane.c  L Of course it is risk free to be the first one to use the latest and greatestJ software on a M$soft box, that is if your current hardware can support it.  F I would advise all administrators of any system to keep current on theG security issues, and make sure that you have a good recovery procedure.m    L This last one did not autoexecute.  One of the previous ones did.  Enough TVF and Print Journalists have now pointed this out to the script kiddies.5 These writers are slowly learning from this feedback.r  J Since these people crave publicity, the last thing that a victim should do is admit to collateral damage.    I It might be nice for those 911 sites that are running OpenVMS to reassureuL the public as to why their service will not be interrupted from these little pranks.w   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 12:40:01 -0400' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>r& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus( Message-ID: <8f465c$ifs$1@pyrite.mv.net>  + Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> wrote in messagem% news:VA.00000036.056d44c9@sture.ch...fH > In article <sh88p9u5oju67@corp.supernews.com>, John E. Malmberg wrote:   ...   K > > The problem with Outlook/Explorer is that under certain conditions theya willF > > execute these macros with out asking, automatically as soon as the messaget > > is opened. > >)K > Yes indeed. As I pointed out yesterday, the Preview Pane is on by defaulty inK > various (all?) versions of Outlook. The Preview Pane of course is lookingtB > inside the mail and presumably has the ability to execute stuff.  E Although in this particular case (an attachment, rather than embeddedaE script) Previewing the message was not dangerous, messages containingrK embedded scripting could be.  Options can be set to disable or require useriJ confirmation for script execution, and I *think* (though haven't tried it)L that the ability to set up multiple 'security zones' allows these options to7 be set differently for email than for general browsing.n   - bill   > ___t > Paul Sture
 > Switzerlandh >i   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 11:43:08 -0500d, From: Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com>& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus> Message-ID: <hshubs-B24859.11430807052000@news.mindspring.com>  K In article <8f2va9$bt0$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> t wrote:  J >In every individual instance, it was done by the person who clicked on anI >attachment without having a clue that it was safe to do so - despite theOL >explicit warning "Some files can contain viruses or otherwise be harmful toG >your computer.  It is important to be certain that this file is from aOE >trustworthy source." in the dialog box that asks whether to save they >attachment to disk or open it.i  O This warning shows up by default?  If not, it might as well not exist at all.  u People live on defaults.    L >Funny thing, though:  adults tend to like to make decisions for themselves,  N That's very true.  However, they tend also to not like to make decisions they O don't care about.  They call that "wasting their time with trivia," where they vI get to decide what is trivia and what isn't.  That's why defaults are so u
 important.    I >Ever?  And *could* you if you had a need to?  There's a large differencel> >between *choosing* not to and being prohibited from doing so.  N Yes, I could.  As I believe I said, I do this for a living: system management 8 and programming.  Privs are not exactly new to me. BFHD.    M >Like the Mac, perhaps?  Not being a Mac user, I didn't realize they even had K >multi-user protection, let alone always ran with it enabled in single-usertK >environments.  BeOS is an example of a largely single-user system that mayoK >have multi-user protection, but then again it's only a couple of years oldsG >rather than the decades-old single-user bases from which Win9x and Mac  >spring.  M I don't recall saying that the Mac has such things, but it does.  For a long uH time now, remote access has been through a user validation dialog which O determines who someone is, and therefore what they've been allowed to access.  m/ By -default-, nothing is shared on a Macintosh.t  N Recently, with the release of MacOS 9, Apple added what they call "Multi-user N mode", which is supposed to add a similar capability to local users' access.  1 Having not seen this yet, I can't speak about it.   I But then, I don't consider the MacOS, through 8.6, to be a true OS.  I'm n waiting for MacOS 10.n    J >behave pretty much the same way Outhouse does.  If so, that suggests that< >you should be a bit more careful with your generalizations.  E I can't speak to assertions about CDE, not knowing anything about it.e    K >So every once in a while, when I see one of the more egregious examples of L >VMS bigotry pop up, I lob a grenade into the discussion just to see whetherM >there's *anyone* around here not already too ossified in their beliefs to be E >able to think a bit outside their conventional box.  But I'm usuallyg >disappointed.  K When you throw grenades around, you shouldn't be surprised if people throw yH them back at you.  Throwing grenades is an attack, so you should not be & surprised when youare counterattacked. -- s; Howard S Shubs      hshubs@mindspring.com    hshubs@bix.comi? The Denim Adept     Which is better, Maryann or pickled Ginger?s> SPAM: uce@ftc.gov   postmaster@[127.0.0.1]   abuse@[127.0.0.1]   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 12:56:14 -0400' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>>& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus( Message-ID: <8f473q$mgo$1@pyrite.mv.net>  H Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- <system@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote in message* news:009E9B8F.AF736EB2@SendSpamHere.ORG...L > In article <8f2va9$bt0$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:, >MB > >Funny thing, though:  adults tend to like to make decisions for themselves,sH > >regardless of the opinions of elitists (I was tempted to say 'elitistI > >assholes', but that wouldn't be polite) who might wish otherwise.  And  they) > >buy products that allow them to do so.i > L > Hmm.  That's ironic as it's adults (at least by definition, citizens of 18L > years of age or older) that have elected our present US federal "you can't= > think for yourself so we'll do it for you" politcal regime.n  3 Unfortunately, it's usually necessary to select theeI overall-least-objectionable of a few (even if you include fringe parties) H party platforms, each of which contains a lot to disagree with.  But theJ actual amount of individual freedom is pretty acceptable, despite a lot of& questionable choices around the edges.   >sK > >Ever?  And *could* you if you had a need to?  There's a large differencei@ > >between *choosing* not to and being prohibited from doing so. >d* > Try choosing NOT to pay your income tax.  H I was not aware that payment of my income tax protected me from anythingL (except the consequences if I did not).  But I do have the option to opt outK of many of the protection mechanisms it pays for if I want to, which was my- point.   >,A > >VMS users can be justifiably grateful that they were spared anhL > >unpleasantness that many were not.  But to legitimately boast about VMS'sL > >superiority in this area, VMS would have to support all the features thatL > >the Great Unwashed have grown to like in more popular email systems *and*H > >retain its vaunted strengths (which of course are very real, but just don'teK > >seem to outweigh its 'strangeness' in most real-world sales situations).. > >wF > >As long as the demands for VMS enhancements come mostly from a user familyL > >tree that by and large does not fork (so to speak), such overall-superiorI > >facilities in email (or other areas) don't seem likely to appear:  thedI > >people who use VMS have mostly done so forever, are largely happy with  it, L > >just want more of the same, and aren't inclined to press for the kinds ofG > >enhancements that might make it attractive to the people who *don't*r alreadyi7 > >use it but might if they found it more approachable.i > > J > >So every once in a while, when I see one of the more egregious examples ofF > >VMS bigotry pop up, I lob a grenade into the discussion just to see whethergL > >there's *anyone* around here not already too ossified in their beliefs to beG > >able to think a bit outside their conventional box.  But I'm usuallya > >disappointed. >oL > You've labeled it bigotry but it could be mere common sense!  A great manyH > of us here have used VMS since its inception.  A great many used other sys-L > tems prior to that.  A microcosm of this group was likely using the inter-J > net (ARPAnet, MILnet, etc.) while Bill was still failing his way throughJ > Harvard or prior to the commercialization of the internet.  Mail was for+ > messages and FTP used for file transfers.   L And the Internet did not exist and even if it had, FTPing a file of any sizeD through a 110 baud modem would have been inadvisable (not to mentionG requiring that the recipient be connected at the time of the transfer).m      I have nothing against the useK > of MIME features in mail.  HTTP links embedded in a document... great!  IjK > would prefer to be able to elect to download an image or an executable ornJ > a script than to have it unwittingly thrust upon me and/or my systems in > an attachment.  J And that option should be available to you.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if it already is.   >nI > ... and as for the argument that the general population is TOO IGNORANTsJ > to learn a computer and thus, needs these stupid features ... well, I do > not buy into that.  C Neither do I, which is one reason I didn't advance it.  The generalmH population simply wants convenience, and they get it (but not from VMS).   - bill  5   The weather just turned hot here where I reside andiI > the old thermostat was not properly functioning to cycle the air condi-eI > tioner.  Time to buy a new thermostat.  Have you look recently at thesetJ > things?  These things have more programmable features -- buttons, menus,H > etc. -- than your beloved O/S authored by the Redmond league of misfitI > programmers.  Everywhere you look today, we're bombarded with new high-5J > tech gizmos and I have to assume there's a market for them or they wouldJ > not be offered to te public.  I'm tired of the argument that the generalJ > public is too stupid to use a computer that bgInc. has to add all of the& > mind-numbing, dumbing-down features. >  >u > --4 > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 VAXman@TMESIS.COM  >eF > GNU Freeware -- What does the GNU *really* stand for?  Garbage!  Not Usable!w   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 11:52:13 -0500', From: Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com>& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus> Message-ID: <hshubs-3B958B.11521307052000@news.mindspring.com>  K In article <8f34jt$i95$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>   wrote:  J >The file *never* came from a trustworthy source, whether you consider the  L The file -always- came from someone who had the receipient on their address M list.  That generally implies that the one at least knows -of- the other, if uH not directly than as someone in their chain-of-command.  That certainly D -sounds- "trustworthy".  Perhaps you have a different definition of  "trustworthy"?    9 >taught people), but it's not an indictment of Microsoft.*  ; Why do you keep defending Microsoft?  Does it give you joy?      >Microsoft made a reasonable7 >effort to help them stay out of trouble when doing so,    -Very- debatable point.      >and the fact that itoG >underestimated user stupidity is not something which in some way makese' >Microsoft culpable for that stupidity.n  K Microsoft knows better.  They're not stupid.  Yet they provided a brick to  6 users with no better reason than, "They asked for it."    K >be too much of an imposition, given the relative infrequency of executablehI >attachments and the fact that it takes only one additional click to pass   K Given that the things -are- relatively infrequent, why not get rid of them  M entirely?  -As- a system manager, I want things which make -my- life easier, IF and that means preventing the users from needing to call me more than ; necessary.  Silly shit like this is completely preventable.a    9 >As is the freedom to opt out of security you don't want.   H In order to opt out of something, you had to have it in the first place.    L >And this entire discussion is also irrelevant to the question of whether MSK >ships a lousy OS, since it has exposed no deficiencies in either the OS orkM >the email application that runs on it.  At worst Microsoft may be consideredhJ >to have shipped its software with less than optimal default settings - an, >experience VMS has had in its past as well.  J I detect a conceptual chasm here.  We're not communicating with Mr. Todd, L we're just talking at him.  And visa versa, but I suspect that since he's a  troll, he expected that.      J Yes, I know we shouldn't feed the trolls, but it's fun to beat up on them 
 occasionally.m --  ; Howard S Shubs      hshubs@mindspring.com    hshubs@bix.coms? The Denim Adept     Which is better, Maryann or pickled Ginger?f> SPAM: uce@ftc.gov   postmaster@[127.0.0.1]   abuse@[127.0.0.1]   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 11:55:23 -0500i, From: Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com>& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus> Message-ID: <hshubs-94E3BE.11552207052000@news.mindspring.com>  C In article <shb03g3hqil126@corp.supernews.com>, "John E. Malmberg"   <wb8tyw@qsl.net> wrote:f  M >This last one did not autoexecute.  One of the previous ones did.  Enough TVeG >and Print Journalists have now pointed this out to the script kiddies.o6 >These writers are slowly learning from this feedback.  I It doesn't matter.  Security-through-obscurity is just a delaying tactic.  -- f; Howard S Shubs      hshubs@mindspring.com    hshubs@bix.comp? The Denim Adept     Which is better, Maryann or pickled Ginger?C> SPAM: uce@ftc.gov   postmaster@[127.0.0.1]   abuse@[127.0.0.1]   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 13:12:04 -0400' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>b& Subject: Re: the latest billybox virus( Message-ID: <8f481g$n10$1@pyrite.mv.net>  7 Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com> wrote in messagea8 news:hshubs-3B958B.11521307052000@news.mindspring.com...L > In article <8f34jt$i95$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> > wrote: > L > >The file *never* came from a trustworthy source, whether you consider the >tE > The file -always- came from someone who had the receipient on their  addressdK > list.  That generally implies that the one at least knows -of- the other,m ifI > not directly than as someone in their chain-of-command.  That certainly E > -sounds- "trustworthy".  Perhaps you have a different definition ofo > "trustworthy"?  K It's partly that I have a clear understanding of what 'certain' means.  ButpJ I also suggest that anyone sufficiently incompetent to pass along an emailI virus can't reasonably be termed 'trustworthy' in this context (which is, G after all, precisely the context the warning exists in).  If that's nots? possible for you to grasp, I'm afraid I can't help you further.d   >w > ; > >taught people), but it's not an indictment of Microsoft., >r= > Why do you keep defending Microsoft?  Does it give you joy?   H Not particularly:  I just value rational thinking, little of which seems3 evident in this group on subjects such as this one.t  B > >be too much of an imposition, given the relative infrequency of
 executableK > >attachments and the fact that it takes only one additional click to passu >cL > Given that the things -are- relatively infrequent, why not get rid of them > entirely?S  G Because they're quite convenient on the occasions when they *are* used..  C   -As- a system manager, I want things which make -my- life easier, G > and that means preventing the users from needing to call me more thane= > necessary.  Silly shit like this is completely preventable.e  J Absolutely.  And you have all the mechanisms you need today in Outhouse to9 do so (you do set up systems for your users, don't you?).a   >  >f; > >As is the freedom to opt out of security you don't want.  > J > In order to opt out of something, you had to have it in the first place.  9 See above:  Outhouse provides what you need in this area.o   >  >rK > >And this entire discussion is also irrelevant to the question of whethere MSJ > >ships a lousy OS, since it has exposed no deficiencies in either the OS orD > >the email application that runs on it.  At worst Microsoft may be
 consideredL > >to have shipped its software with less than optimal default settings - an. > >experience VMS has had in its past as well. > K > I detect a conceptual chasm here.  We're not communicating with Mr. Todd, K > we're just talking at him.  And visa versa, but I suspect that since he's  ai > troll, he expected that.  F Actually, I don't consider myself a troll (and don't particularly careG whether you may).  I usually raise these issues because of the residualtG feeling from days long past that VMS users were a cut above the generaleJ population in their analytical abilities and might respond to reason if it5 was placed sufficiently close underneath their noses..   - bill   >: >  > K > Yes, I know we shouldn't feed the trolls, but it's fun to beat up on theme > occasionally.c > --= > Howard S Shubs      hshubs@mindspring.com    hshubs@bix.comgA > The Denim Adept     Which is better, Maryann or pickled Ginger? @ > SPAM: uce@ftc.gov   postmaster@[127.0.0.1]   abuse@[127.0.0.1]   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 14:34:52 +0900r2 From: Mike Rechtman <michael.rechtman@digital.com>" Subject: Re: VEST, last version...+ Message-ID: <39157F0C.2D536F67@digital.com>i  $ Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote: > M > Quickie question.  What was the last released version of DECmigrate (VEST)?iL > Bonus question... What month/year of the Alpha product library CDs might I > find this final release. >  V 1.1i Still available, try:l; http://www.digital.com/amt/decmigrate/ftp-instructions.htmle   MikeE ----------------------------------------------------------------------E Usual disclaimer: All opinions are mine alone, perhaps not even that.m? Mike Rechtman                            *rechtman@tzora.co.il* F Kibbutz Tzor'a.                          Voice (home): 972-2-9908337  B   "20% of a job takes 80% of the time, the rest takes another 80%"E ---------------------------------------------------------------------e   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 07 May 2000 17:55:43 +1000 - From: David B Sneddon <dbsneddon@bigpond.com>n, Subject: Re: wich list: DIRECTORY limitation0 Message-ID: <07554344033463@domain3.bigpond.com>  - At 03:00 PM 06-05-2000 GMT, Bob Kaplow wrote:oL >In article <8emeeh$31n$1@info.service.rug.nl>, helbig@astro.rug.nl (Phillip Helbig) writes:i >> DIRECTORY >> o
 >>   /EXCLUDEt >>  $ >>         /EXCLUDE=(filespec[,...]) >>  H >>      Excludes the specified files from the DIRECTORY command. You canG >>      include a directory but not a device in the file specification. F >>      The asterisk (*)  and the percent sign (%) wildcard charactersF >>      are allowed in the file specification. However, you cannot useF >>      relative version numbers to exclude a specific version. If you< >>      specify only one file, you can omit the parentheses. >> eG >> Is there hope that the two restrictions above will be lifted in the   >> future?  Ditto for BACKUP:a >>  G >>      Do not use a device specification when defining the files to be H >>      excluded. You can use most standard wildcard characters, but youH >>      cannot use wildcard characters denoting latest versions of files0 >>      (;) or relative versions of files (;-n). >.K >Does anyone have a good workaround for this. A few weeks ago, I was tryingsE >to figure out what a PURGE on a particular disk would get me back. I K >couldn't find any easy way to get a directory listing with sizes of what a I >given PURGE command would delete. Surely if PURGE can figure out what togA >delete, there must be a DIRECTORY syntax to list the same files?o >h
 >	Bob Kaplow	s >oF >SPAM:	spamrecycle@ChooseYourmail.com	uce@ftc.gov	postmaster@127.0.0.1 >aI There is a utility around that will do this.  I can't remember what it isaF called but probably have a copy around on one of my systems.  You giveH it the filespecs that you want to delete and it gives you a listing withG the sizes... I'll have a look for it and post the details.  (I'm sure I < got it from either an old DECUS tape or from Hunter's site.)   Regards, Dave.mI -------------------------------------------------------------------------aI David B Sneddon (dbs)  OpenVMS Systems Programmer   dbsneddon@bigpond.com F DBS software is at http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/software.htmI "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" LennonI   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2000.255 ************************already too ossified in their beliefs to be E >able to think a bit outside their conventional box.  But I'm usuallyg >disappointed.  K When you throw gre^Psx	KvXCI71|=lڲ,H{t\W$&OQY?֫-<Il^,
P
"	j8j?O7P>OǡqZ&^opsIeti쒫IRpx~" `tV6Zf.W
$Z(-~*<TAw/9G66<_*oB`FD3j1wWĐ䈆3(j%BRdw2wX
KR?&NJ
dN ?ʶU~?0)vt	O{ӧ<FQI4& Hjey3PΝQYkwogls_ ~zJ{K {+GyXKM   4m yla*xll' H	*T;fF,,}U%WOBT0c~[m-ftȭm^
-6x1'3]@DEKߠ1s^R4O|=@9"s?mXCQ+,DɄi=#!yqH8W/ZVr w&aŭТ8E WiZd`.ir0<#gnPSL?VЏCʛ+\
0좛A5 { *#zw>%^Z%fR
Nc<YQBZ#MY*qYd
1z3Q%psʬrfUh&L<^jpC2z䌲lHLhJ!⦤nV'|2<+ٚ}*CK%d72aAPNѣK=daL`I?jь伔B 2  L]^u=BZvxrK5
q-L<~x0_U$>9@lӟƵ
|40wyt} w
iORS!]፻Ha;{M[Y
9e|KV]
;Cer˼,PHv4(bZcev"cJݠ;G#z@.́~g:?|	xԁ51|NjKu+W)R*hS`ئ3ǁ<v#X)ָ݂]umO_v+Ol'fF+Q8G-O	[zE80ȡ"bKؙp\菚6{H[yP(&s9G!ȁ!G㔶IT'_3vC'^OW
M%"]d*Dlsh'P0.zcޔ=4ϼaiv^1 ]E`ty{F   >Kˤ"N˕@EV9o~o]:!h\/ck8>p8X!%b!>&v-W!<rf