 | | Virus Email —Dan Mattia
|
| | | I've just recieved the "Microsoft Update" security patch from the sender using all the Lugnet email addresses. The exe is named q136579.exe. I'm forwarding this to his host and to Microsoft. The email addresses listed below recieved the email: (...) (22 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Virus Email —Rob Doucette
|
| | | | | (...) And by posting them here they are sure to be harvested again for spam. -Rob. (22 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Virus Email —Dan Mattia
|
| | | | | | They're not clickable. That means the spammer would have to type it in. I try to warn people and I get arrogant people to post. ~Dan (...) (22 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Virus Email —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | | | Even if they're not clickable, they can be harvested. They just need to be in the format of email addresses. I wouldn't be surprised if someone wrote a bot to scrape up "name at address dot com" too. But, for now that's safe. -Tim (...) (22 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Virus Email —John Radtke
|
| | | | | | | (...) Take a pill. I'm not up on spam technology but I would be very surprised if clickable had much to do with it. Harvesting addresses would hardly be profitable if a person literally had to take the time to click on each one. One could imagine (...) (22 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Virus Email —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Indeed. Were I you, Dan, I'd drop a note to admin@lugnet.com with the url of your original post, asking that it be canceled. Todd's worked hard to make spam harvesting harder here, Dan. The people trying to point that out, and suggest that you (...) (22 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Virus Email —Rob Doucette
|
| | | | | | | (...) Bots harvest e-mail address from posts, mailto: is not required. I (...) Posting a bunch of e-mail addresses wasn't necessary... generally speaking its bad form. Not sure what part of my response you found arrogant. (22 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Virus Email —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Not to mention that this whole thread doesn't belong in lugnet.general. Plus, there really isn't any good purpose in spreading e-mails warning about such viruses. I've been getting several copies a day of one or another of the "Microsoft (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-03, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Virus Email —Matthias Jaenichen
|
| | | | | | "Dan Mattia" <lego_dan44@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:HF9320.16IG@lugnet.com... (...) They are clickable!!! I am using Outlook Newsreader, and it automatically converts everything that looks like a mail address or URL into "clickable". (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Virus Email —John Henry Kruer
|
| | | | | That is becoming very common these days. I get 3 or four a day in my old yahoo account, and with a size of more then 200 kilobites, they aren't easy on the email account either. Ugg, sometimes I just want to close my ears and scream... -JHK (...) (...) (22 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Virus Email —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Well I just received an e-mail offering 27,800,000 e-mail IDs for me to Spam [I expect I'm one of them]. The offer did contain two interesting [if true] "facts": ==+== 1) 41% of Consumers Believe Email is a Good Way to Find out About New (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
