"Myron Davis" <myrond (at) xyxx (dot) com [email concealed]> writes:
> Theoretically one could modify a worm to send random zip'd files of zeros
> along the way to different hosts to really kill the destinations
> computers.
>
Is this all just back to fail open/fail closed? I have a file that
will cause XXX virus scanner to crash. Does the SMTP agent view that
as a reason to reject the email or does it pass it through?
If it does a temporary rejection message because of some internal
failure, the infection rateof these messages becomes very low. Not
sure how virus scanners + SMTP servers interact with regards to
tradition SMTP errors.
It would be an effective anti-cleanup method though.
--
Chris Green <cmg (at) dok (dot) org [email concealed]>
Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever.
> Theoretically one could modify a worm to send random zip'd files of zeros
> along the way to different hosts to really kill the destinations
> computers.
>
Is this all just back to fail open/fail closed? I have a file that
will cause XXX virus scanner to crash. Does the SMTP agent view that
as a reason to reject the email or does it pass it through?
If it does a temporary rejection message because of some internal
failure, the infection rateof these messages becomes very low. Not
sure how virus scanners + SMTP servers interact with regards to
tradition SMTP errors.
It would be an effective anti-cleanup method though.
--
Chris Green <cmg (at) dok (dot) org [email concealed]>
Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever.
[ reply ]