full-disclosure - FD should block attachments

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <IDENKGNNGHACMHOAIOOJMEGKCFAA.sean01@accnet.com.au>
From: sean01 at accnet.com.au (Sean Crawford)
Subject: FD should block attachments

Michael Gale wrote---->>

>I like how you are able to reply with such an educated answer. Of course
>you are right, I only wish more people were able to express them selves
>with such grace and intelligence as you are able to do.

I don't deny that my reply was blunt and maybe lacking in some area's and
for that I do apologize , now I will take the time to explain my position
more clearly and quote from anther members reply who expressed my own views
with a little more eloquence.

Nick FitzGerald wrote------>

>Dude -- this was done-to-death less than a fortnight ago when another
>subscriber made similar "complaints" because a virus that spoofed his
>address posted a copy of itself to the list.  One of the list
>maintainers then gave a detailed explanation of why belly-aching about
>viruses being sent to the the list will not produce any change in the
>list's configuration.  You should go read that (URL may wrap):

>http://lists.netsys.com/pipermail/full-disclosure/2004-
>March/019182.html

>then either STFU or get off the list, as we are all sick of hearing
>about this and it seems pretty darn certain that yet another clueless
>whinge of the same sort will be similarly ignored by the list
>maintainers.

I couldn't agree with these sentiments more.

Michael Gale wrote---->>

>Now since you have trouble reading, which must be the case since you
>miss all the points of my two e-mails.

I have no trouble reading at all and that's why I'm sick of reading about
people like yourself trying to flog a dead horse with subjects like 'FD
should block attachments' and 'viruses being sent to this list' or
suggesting moderation of the list in a post.

>I did not say we should filter the content of the list.

Well why would you pick a subject like, 'FD should block attachments' would
this not be a filtering of some kind?.
I agree a link to a virus would be a much better way intentionally posting
such a file but most of the virus that hit the list are not intentional as
they seem to be coming from someone infected.
This topic also has been flogged to death on this very list.

>I like how you are one of those open minded people who can discuss new
>topics and idea's.

I see nothing new in your post at all only the renaming of an old topic.
Next time if I bother to reply to such a post it wont be at 2AM, however I'm
thinking now that this whole thread is a waste of bandwidth.