On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:15:20 GMT, vaguely
proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

Didn't even have the brains to attach or post the URL....eeeeeeeegh!

raw footage of russian brother and sister teens forced to have sex in the shower
hvmegwuheppfnlkevduxi

hightlight the message, hit the Ctrl F3 button, select all, copy, then paste
into a new email sent to the X-abuse address...

....don't bother with this one because I already did it.

....High time for this crap to stop...we beat them on spam, time to beat them
on Usenet...get them shut down on whatever venue they use and make them move
on...sooner or later they will run out of options and either leave
altogether or learn to be decent members of society (glass half-full type of
guy).
..
"Old Nick" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:15:20 GMT, vaguely
proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

Didn't even have the brains to attach or post the URL....eeeeeeeegh!

raw footage of russian brother and sister teens forced to have sex in the
shower
hvmegwuheppfnlkevduxi

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 02:35:30 GMT, "Tom Kohlman"
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

I actually report all of these to Spamcop.

reason 1: Often the abuse addresses are spam-traps themselves.
reason 2: they usually simply bounce or ignore you otherwise.

I was told first that SpamCop would accept newsnet stuff, then that it
wouldn't, but having asked and awaiting a reply I still give the
SpamCop

hightlight the message, hit the Ctrl F3 button, select all, copy, then paste
into a new email sent to the X-abuse address...

You make assumptions about what newsreader I use! G


...don't bother with this one because I already did it.

I don't understand why I shouldn't bother. The more reports they get,
the more likely they will take action (if at all :-)

I mounted a crusade here against this stuff a while back. For a long
time it went away. It's creeping back. I still kid myself that my
efforts and SpamCop may have helped....sigh!


...High time for this crap to stop...we beat them on spam, time to beat them
on Usenet...get them shut down on whatever venue they use and make them move
on...sooner or later they will run out of options and either leave
altogether or learn to be decent members of society (glass half-full type of
guy).
.
"Old Nick" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:15:20 GMT, vaguely
proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

Didn't even have the brains to attach or post the URL....eeeeeeeegh!

raw footage of russian brother and sister teens forced to have sex in the
shower
hvmegwuheppfnlkevduxi

In article , Old Nick wrote:


Didn't even have the brains to attach or post the URL....eeeeeeeegh!

I see _you_ didn't have the brains to snip the offensive material from your
followup.

My filters dropped the original post, but thanks to you, the followup came
through. Idiot.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 12:43:33 GMT, (Doug Miller)
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

I did not NEED to snip the "offensive" (in the truest sense of the
word) part. It was missing. If you find the words offensive that's
your problem.....get off the net. **** happens here!

The content of the message, sans any of the usual url or attachment,
was the whole _point_ of my reply.

My "offenc(iv)e is against the intent of these posts, which for the
time being aim at sexual stuff, but cause viruses and worms on your
system.

Since you had to _read_ the contents of my post to see the text, who's
the idiot? I read headers (it's called a "thinking ahead job" in Net
parlance) only and worry about the content if I am stupid enough to
read it. If you can't mentally filter out "shower scene" in a tech
forum, then ......

In my messianic fervour, I feel that stopping these arseholes with
their nasty little viruses and spams is more important than not
offending the odd ball who wants to pick a fight rather than think for
themselves once in a while.

In article , Old Nick wrote:


Didn't even have the brains to attach or post the URL....eeeeeeeegh!

I see _you_ didn't have the brains to snip the offensive material from your
followup.

My filters dropped the original post, but thanks to you, the followup came
through. Idiot.

Nice going Dougie. In a previous reply you knock someone for using
inflammatory terms such as "miscreant" or "moron" and then you call Old
Nick an idiot. Way to go, you're a real clASS act.

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 10:00:31 +0800, Old Nick wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:15:20 GMT, vaguely
proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

Didn't even have the brains to attach or post the URL....eeeeeeeegh!

raw footage of russian brother and sister teens forced to have sex in the shower
hvmegwuheppfnlkevduxi


There was an attachment, but it was simply a carrier for the "BackDoor-AZV.gen" Trojan. Your anti-virus software probably deleted
it.

Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS USA

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:08:49 +0800, Old Nick wrote:

I did not NEED to snip the "offensive" (in the truest sense of the
word) part. It was missing. If you find the words offensive that's
your problem.....get off the net. **** happens here!

His point, which you are missing, is that that message didn't make
it to a whole lot of newsservers around the word. However, your response
did. In effect, you helped the spammer get their message out by
replying to it and leaving it in.

The content of the message, sans any of the usual url or attachment,
was the whole _point_ of my reply.

I'm sure that the spammer who doesn't visit this group will be
very impressed by your well-crafted response.

My "offenc(iv)e is against the intent of these posts, which for the
time being aim at sexual stuff, but cause viruses and worms on your
system.

Won't do anything to _my_ systems...

Since you had to _read_ the contents of my post to see the text, who's
the idiot? I read headers (it's called a "thinking ahead job" in Net
parlance)

It is? Never heard the term, ever, in the last dozen years.

In my messianic fervour, I feel that stopping these arseholes with
their nasty little viruses and spams is more important than not
offending the odd ball who wants to pick a fight rather than think for
themselves once in a while.

Whining about (and quoting) spam in a newsgroup doesn't stop 'em,
and quoting it helps 'em. So, why not report it through spamcop or
directly instead, which actually has a positive effect in stopping
them? Same effort, much different results.

In article , Old Nick
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 12:43:33 GMT, (Doug Miller)
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

I did not NEED to snip the "offensive" (in the truest sense of the
word) part. It was missing. If you find the words offensive that's
your problem.....get off the net. **** happens here!

The content of the message, sans any of the usual url or attachment,
was the whole _point_ of my reply.

And what point would that be? Your major accomplishment was to further
propagate the spam.

My "offenc(iv)e is against the intent of these posts, which for the
time being aim at sexual stuff, but cause viruses and worms on your
system.

Maybe on yours, not on mine.

Since you had to _read_ the contents of my post to see the text, who's
the idiot? I read headers (it's called a "thinking ahead job" in Net
parlance) only and worry about the content if I am stupid enough to
read it. If you can't mentally filter out "shower scene" in a tech
forum, then ......

The *header* was offensive, but you propagated it anyway; I didn't have to
read the content of your post to see that. So, indeed, who's the idiot?

Hint: the original had a few additional words in it, which I edited out, along
with the offensive content.

In my messianic fervour, I feel that stopping these arseholes with
their nasty little viruses and spams is more important than not
offending the odd ball who wants to pick a fight rather than think for
themselves once in a while.

And exactly how does quoting and reposting the _entire_ message do anything to
"stop these arseholes"? Perhaps you should try doing a little thinking for
yourself once in a while, if you can manage to cool your messianic fervor
enough to permit the use of whatever rudimentary logical faculties you may
happen to possess.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:39:33 GMT, Tom Veatch
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 10:00:31 +0800, Old Nick wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:15:20 GMT, vaguely
proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

Didn't even have the brains to attach or post the URL....eeeeeeeegh!

raw footage of russian brother and sister teens forced to have sex in the shower
hvmegwuheppfnlkevduxi


There was an attachment, but it was simply a carrier for the "BackDoor-AZV.gen" Trojan. Your anti-virus software probably deleted
it.

Very strange. I have Free Agent, which shows attachments as a separate
entity, if they are there. The Virus checker cannot see it until I ask
to launch it (and did _not_ see it when I tried one once :-) The
message as I saw it had no sign of an attachment. Maybe my ISP is now
removing them, but not as far as I know.

On 22 Jun 2004 17:35:18 GMT, Dave Hinz vaguely
proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:08:49 +0800, Old Nick wrote:

I did not NEED to snip the "offensive" (in the truest sense of the
word) part. It was missing. If you find the words offensive that's
your problem.....get off the net. **** happens here!

His point, which you are missing, is that that message didn't make
it to a whole lot of newsservers around the word. However, your response
did. In effect, you helped the spammer get their message out by
replying to it and leaving it in.

The content of the message, sans any of the usual url or attachment,
was the whole _point_ of my reply.

I'm sure that the spammer who doesn't visit this group will be
very impressed by your well-crafted response.

My "offenc(iv)e is against the intent of these posts, which for the
time being aim at sexual stuff, but cause viruses and worms on your
system.

Won't do anything to _my_ systems...

Since you had to _read_ the contents of my post to see the text, who's
the idiot? I read headers (it's called a "thinking ahead job" in Net
parlance)


It is? Never heard the term, ever, in the last dozen years.

errrrrrrrrr....it woz a joak.....

Whining about (and quoting) spam in a newsgroup doesn't stop 'em,
and quoting it helps 'em. So, why not report it through spamcop or
directly instead, which actually has a positive effect in stopping
them? Same effort, much different results.

I ****ing do. I DON'T reply to the many spams that come here, except
in this one case. I replied to this one. When I tried to get people to
DO somethong about it, last time, all I had was jerkoffs like you
having a mudsling and saying that it didn't matter. I was not
"whining", ****. I was trying to get some action, as best I knew how.

**** YOU ARSEHOLE. FILTER THAT!

....spamcop will accept Usenet abuse??? News to me! Tell me more. As for
the reporting to the abuse addresses, I wouldn't worry about the address if
it is from a legit ISP. My experience is that it will get ignored but I
don't think it's like the "click to remove" button that will give you 10
times more Spam than you were trying to avoid in the normal E-mail
situation.

....sorry about the instructions about how to find the sender
details...should have specified that the routine was for OE...editorial
comment here though...the third party news readers are the ones that supply
the anonymous posting services...why would anybody desire that unless they
were trying to be buttheads???


"Old Nick" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 02:35:30 GMT, "Tom Kohlman"
vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

I actually report all of these to Spamcop.

reason 1: Often the abuse addresses are spam-traps themselves.
reason 2: they usually simply bounce or ignore you otherwise.

I was told first that SpamCop would accept newsnet stuff, then that it
wouldn't, but having asked and awaiting a reply I still give the
SpamCop

hightlight the message, hit the Ctrl F3 button, select all, copy, then
paste
into a new email sent to the X-abuse address...

You make assumptions about what newsreader I use! G


...don't bother with this one because I already did it.

I don't understand why I shouldn't bother. The more reports they get,
the more likely they will take action (if at all :-)

I mounted a crusade here against this stuff a while back. For a long
time it went away. It's creeping back. I still kid myself that my
efforts and SpamCop may have helped....sigh!


...High time for this crap to stop...we beat them on spam, time to beat
them
on Usenet...get them shut down on whatever venue they use and make them
move
on...sooner or later they will run out of options and either leave
altogether or learn to be decent members of society (glass half-full type
of
guy).
.
"Old Nick" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:15:20 GMT, vaguely
proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

Didn't even have the brains to attach or post the URL....eeeeeeeegh!

raw footage of russian brother and sister teens forced to have sex in
the
shower
hvmegwuheppfnlkevduxi

In article , Old Nick wrote:
[much immature whining snipped]
FILTER THAT!

No problem, mate, you're in the KF now. Have a nice day.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:23:24 +0800, Old Nick wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:39:33 GMT, Tom Veatch
vaguely proposed a theory

There was an attachment, but it was simply a carrier for the
"BackDoor-AZV.gen" Trojan. Your anti-virus software probably deleted it.

Very strange. I have Free Agent, which shows attachments as a separate
entity, if they are there. The Virus checker cannot see it until I ask to
launch it (and did _not_ see it when I tried one once :-) The message as
I saw it had no sign of an attachment. Maybe my ISP is now removing them,
but not as far as I know.

Many news servers will strip all binaries posted to non-binary newsgroups.
That's why we post pictures to a.b.p.w instead of here. I'm surprised that
you saw the attachment at all, Tom.

--
Joe Wells

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 02:58:34 GMT, Tom Kohlman wrote:
...spamcop will accept Usenet abuse??? News to me! Tell me more.

Has for years, mate, right there on the front page I seem to recall.
(I get a different interface, being a subscriber).

...editorial
comment here though...the third party news readers are the ones that supply
the anonymous posting services...why would anybody desire that unless they
were trying to be buttheads???

Third party newsreaders are software. Anonymous posting services are
servers. There is no correlation between "not using the most frequent
target of viruses, worms, and security exploits", and using an anonymous
posting server.

Dave Hinz

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:26:53 +0800, Old Nick wrote:
On 22 Jun 2004 17:35:18 GMT, Dave Hinz vaguely
proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

It is? Never heard the term, ever, in the last dozen years.

errrrrrrrrr....it woz a joak.....

Ah, I thought you were just inventing a term on the spot and presenting
it as something that exists. I suppose it was you saying so that gave
me that impression.

Whining about (and quoting) spam in a newsgroup doesn't stop 'em,
and quoting it helps 'em. So, why not report it through spamcop or
directly instead, which actually has a positive effect in stopping
them? Same effort, much different results.

I ****ing do.

That's great to hear. Oddly inconsistant with you helping the
spammer by reposting it, though.

I DON'T reply to the many spams that come here, except
in this one case. I replied to this one. When I tried to get people to
DO somethong about it, last time, all I had was jerkoffs like you
having a mudsling and saying that it didn't matter.

Where specifically did I say it didn't matter? Sounds out of
character for me (translation: not bloody likely).

I was not
"whining", ****. I was trying to get some action, as best I knew how.

So your best idea on how to stop spam from propegating is to quote
it in entirity, bypassing the cancel messages and/or filters that
have blocked it from doing so? May I suggest you do some reading on
the topic, as your approach seems fundamentally flawed.

**** YOU ARSEHOLE. FILTER THAT!

Oh, that's easy, unless you're in the habit of changing your
posting name to evade killfiles.

Obviously you don't have the spine to admit that quoting spam
was a mistake that you made, and move on. So much easier to say
"Yeah, you're right, what was I thinking", or at least to just
not do it any more. But no, you choose to go on the offensive
when you've clearly got nothing to work with.

Dave Hinz wrote:
snip of attempt to reason with a potty mouth:

Might as well give it a rest Dave, you're trying to teach the pig
to sing. It is good to know that spamcop accepts usenet abuse
though, thanks.
Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 17:07:33 GMT, dave in fairfax wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote:
snip of attempt to reason with a potty mouth:

Might as well give it a rest Dave, you're trying to teach the pig
to sing. It is good to know that spamcop accepts usenet abuse
though, thanks.

Good point, and you're most welcome. I think it's a free reporting
option - if you don't see it, maybe they have that only for subscribers,
but I don't think so.

Have fun,
Dave

I'm a subscriber to SpamCop too for several years now but unlikely I will
ever use up the account since the Spammers seem to know when I'm home and
likely to report while it's "in progress"...once the Spam gets a few minutes
old reporting is only self-gratification as they have already moved on to
the next zombie computer so I don't bother and JHD...all that said I've
never seen any hint that I can report Usenet abuse. I've tried a few times
but the header info is different and it always comes up with nada. Will try
again.

as for the use of third party news readers...times have changed I think (and
a pretty good explanation of why all this crap is showing up here lately).
So-called "re-mailers" are using the 3rd parties to route the posts. Below
comes from Curt at newsreader.com. He seems to be a decent person and I
think if stuff is routed through this maze he will take action. Forget
about nymalias routing through MIT...they don't care. Curt's explanations
follows:

Here's some details on how my service and usenet in general works in case
you are intereseted....

My service (like most pay usenet services) is configured to protect the
privacy of the poster. The headers make it clear it came from my service
(Path and X-Trace), but my users can add any other headers they want and put
whatever they want in the From: header. The X-Trace header tells me which
user account was used to post the message and to verify with encryption that
it came from my service. So I can always identify, and control, the source
of any Usenet post from my users. I also have logs to trace everything
orginated from my service.

The one user I have is simply running a special email gateway server which
can receive e-mail messages and then automatically forward them to my NNTP
server using his personal account. He his risking his own account (with my
service) by doing this. But it's something he seems willing to do for some
reason.

On the Path: header, I allow users to add one (but only one) extra entry to
the end of the path. That's why he is able to add the "anonymous" path
entry. Some Usenet servers allow any Path: entry on a new post, and some
don't allow them at all.

The Path: line is the only thing you can really trust on a Usenet article.
For a person who is running their own Usenet server (and it's possible to do
even from home on a dial-up internet account), you can forge everthying in
the article. The only thing that is real is the modifications to the Path:
header as the message moves through Usenet. This is the same as the
Receved: headers in email. Everything else in an email message might be
forged, including the oldest Received: headers.





"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 02:58:34 GMT, Tom Kohlman
wrote:
...spamcop will accept Usenet abuse??? News to me! Tell me more.

Has for years, mate, right there on the front page I seem to recall.
(I get a different interface, being a subscriber).

...editorial
comment here though...the third party news readers are the ones that
supply
the anonymous posting services...why would anybody desire that unless
they
were trying to be buttheads???

Third party newsreaders are software. Anonymous posting services are
servers. There is no correlation between "not using the most frequent
target of viruses, worms, and security exploits", and using an anonymous
posting server.

Dave Hinz

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:29:45 GMT, Tom Kohlman wrote:
I'm a subscriber to SpamCop too for several years now but unlikely I will
ever use up the account since the Spammers seem to know when I'm home and
likely to report while it's "in progress"...

I don't have a clue what you're trying to say here. spamcop.net, right?
There's a .com also, not the same thing at all. The accounts on spamcop.net
have been annual rather than "pay per MB" for over a year now. I don't
know what you mean, even a little, about the "while it's in progress".
It's not just about reporting the spammer to the ISP, it's also about
gathering data for the realtime blacklists.

I use SpamCop.net but subscribed before SpamCop changed hands...pre-transfer
was per MB of volume (and which I still have plenty of because the service
has been totally ineffectual in the past year). From your post I guess the
new clients pay by the year and get a different screen. Nice to know...I
guess they are only patronizing the "legacy" accounts to get them to burn up
the remaining account, then get them to switch over to the new way...

As for updating the filters/blacklists on "old" Spam, I think it is a waste
of time. Too many zombie computers out there. I can report 4 hour aged
Span but it is a useless exercise...with more and more Hi-speed access and
plenty of unsecured machines to go with it, the Spammers have "moved on"
after a few minutes. If I'm wrong and SpamCop actually wants to receive
"old" Spam, please let me know.


"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:29:45 GMT, Tom Kohlman
wrote:
I'm a subscriber to SpamCop too for several years now but unlikely I
will
ever use up the account since the Spammers seem to know when I'm home
and
likely to report while it's "in progress"...

I don't have a clue what you're trying to say here. spamcop.net, right?
There's a .com also, not the same thing at all. The accounts on
spamcop.net
have been annual rather than "pay per MB" for over a year now. I don't
know what you mean, even a little, about the "while it's in progress".
It's not just about reporting the spammer to the ISP, it's also about
gathering data for the realtime blacklists.

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 01:46:06 GMT, Tom Kohlman wrote:
I use SpamCop.net but subscribed before SpamCop changed hands...pre-transfer
was per MB of volume (and which I still have plenty of because the service
has been totally ineffectual in the past year).

Sounds like you should switch from "classic" to the new way of doing
it. They'll convert your left-over "fuel" to prorated months.

From your post I guess the
new clients pay by the year and get a different screen. Nice to know...I
guess they are only patronizing the "legacy" accounts to get them to burn up
the remaining account, then get them to switch over to the new way...

If you switch over now, you can take advantage of 18 filters which you
must not be now if you're finding it to be "totally ineffectual".
I block entire continents (SA, Africa), most of Asia by country, and
a dozen or so realtime blackhole lists, all clicky-box selectable.
98 to 99% of the spam I am sent gets caught by the filters, and I
have _never_, as in not once, had a real email end up in the held
mail bucket.

As for updating the filters/blacklists on "old" Spam, I think it is a waste
of time. Too many zombie computers out there. I can report 4 hour aged
Span but it is a useless exercise...with more and more Hi-speed access and
plenty of unsecured machines to go with it, the Spammers have "moved on"
after a few minutes. If I'm wrong and SpamCop actually wants to receive
"old" Spam, please let me know.

They accept it, and a quick "select all", scroll through scanning
the subject line, and "report" takes so little time when it's, what,
200 messages at a time? Again, if this isn't the interface you have,
you might want to switch over.

I leave my inbox on their server, just so I can check it from anywhere,
but it can be forwarded to a non-public address if you want.

Dave Hinz

....Thanks for the info about old vs. new (the site didn't explain any of
this)...Will check it out.

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 01:46:06 GMT, Tom Kohlman
wrote:
I use SpamCop.net but subscribed before SpamCop changed
hands...pre-transfer
was per MB of volume (and which I still have plenty of because the
service
has been totally ineffectual in the past year).

Sounds like you should switch from "classic" to the new way of doing
it. They'll convert your left-over "fuel" to prorated months.

From your post I guess the
new clients pay by the year and get a different screen. Nice to
know...I
guess they are only patronizing the "legacy" accounts to get them to
burn up
the remaining account, then get them to switch over to the new way...

If you switch over now, you can take advantage of 18 filters which you
must not be now if you're finding it to be "totally ineffectual".
I block entire continents (SA, Africa), most of Asia by country, and
a dozen or so realtime blackhole lists, all clicky-box selectable.
98 to 99% of the spam I am sent gets caught by the filters, and I
have _never_, as in not once, had a real email end up in the held
mail bucket.

As for updating the filters/blacklists on "old" Spam, I think it is a
waste
of time. Too many zombie computers out there. I can report 4 hour aged
Span but it is a useless exercise...with more and more Hi-speed access
and
plenty of unsecured machines to go with it, the Spammers have "moved on"
after a few minutes. If I'm wrong and SpamCop actually wants to receive
"old" Spam, please let me know.

They accept it, and a quick "select all", scroll through scanning
the subject line, and "report" takes so little time when it's, what,
200 messages at a time? Again, if this isn't the interface you have,
you might want to switch over.

I leave my inbox on their server, just so I can check it from anywhere,
but it can be forwarded to a non-public address if you want.

Dave Hinz

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:32:43 -0500, Joe Wells wrote:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:23:24 +0800, Old Nick wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:39:33 GMT, Tom Veatch
vaguely proposed a theory

There was an attachment, but it was simply a carrier for the
"BackDoor-AZV.gen" Trojan. Your anti-virus software probably deleted it.

Very strange. I have Free Agent, which shows attachments as a separate
entity, if they are there. The Virus checker cannot see it until I ask to
launch it (and did _not_ see it when I tried one once :-) The message as
I saw it had no sign of an attachment. Maybe my ISP is now removing them,
but not as far as I know.

Many news servers will strip all binaries posted to non-binary newsgroups.
That's why we post pictures to a.b.p.w instead of here. I'm surprised that
you saw the attachment at all, Tom.

Hey, Joe.

Must be an individual ISP thing. I'm using Earthlink's news service and Agent 2.0 as a reader. I can't say with certainty that all
attachments come through, but apparently at least some do.

Well, now that I say that, I'm going to have to also say I'm not sure about this one. Agent shows messages containing an attachment
with a different colored symbol (yellow instead of white with my options settings). Since that message content is long gone, I can't
say for sure what color the symbol was. I can say for sure that when I tried to open it (message? or attachment?) McAfee told me it
was infected and deleted it.

I just looked over my list of message headers and found one, " At dinner last night....", Kevin Singleton, 6/15/2004 4:51 AM,
that indicates it has an attachment. Opening the message index shows one .jpg and four .gif attachments. I didn't open them all, but
the one I did open looks like it might be an icon for a speaker or some such. My guess is that they are the result of his posting in
html or something.

There were a couple of others with extraordinarily large line counts, i.e. 1000, that I suspect would have binary attachments if
downloaded. But when I tried, they were no longer available. The dates were old enough that they were probably beyond the retention
period.


Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS USA