Is email scanning necessary?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

From: "sdlfkj" <blah@blah.com>

| I read that its redundent to have email scanning turned on because of the resource load it
| places on the computer and that email is going to get scanned sooner or later anyways by
| other means. Does that make sense to you people here?
|

I'll assume you mean scannin with anti bvirus softwre.
It is good to scan incoming. It is a waste to scan outgoing.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

>> I read that its redundent to have email scanning turned on because
>> of the resource load it places on the computer and that email is
>> going to get scanned sooner or later anyways by other means. Does
>> that make sense to you people here?
>
> Also, you can allows save any attachments and scan them manually,
> if and when you are in doubt.

I already do that. What this writer was saying was that scanning
automatically doesn't improve security. I'm not worried about
attachments as I already scan those with daily updated antivirus
software. I'm worried about infections that can occur in the
message body. I guess I'll go back to reading messages in Plain
Text most of the time. Its kind of dull, but its sure safer.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

>>>> I read that its redundent to have email scanning turned on because
>>>> of the resource load it places on the computer and that email is
>>>> going to get scanned sooner or later anyways by other means. Does
>>>> that make sense to you people here?
>>>
>>> Also, you can allows save any attachments and scan them manually,
>>> if and when you are in doubt.
>>
>> I already do that. What this writer was saying was that scanning
>> automatically doesn't improve security. I'm not worried about
>> attachments as I already scan those with daily updated antivirus
>> software. I'm worried about infections that can occur in the
>> message body. I guess I'll go back to reading messages in Plain
>> Text most of the time. Its kind of dull, but its sure safer.
>
> Yes, I would say it does improve security because your system can be
> compromised via scripts. But as I mentioned, if you have secured
> your email client (Outlook Express I'm assuming) then it does become
> redundant.

What does it mean......"secured your email client"? Does that mean you're
running anti-virus software?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

GO wrote:

>>What does it mean......"secured your email client"?
>>
>>
>
>It means to lock the client down to prevent any exploits from taking hold of
>your PC. In the case of OE that means configuring the security settings so
>it uses the "Restricted site zones" and said zone is configured to not allow
>scripting, etc.
>
>
>>Does that mean you're running anti-virus software?
>>
>>
>
>Yes, I'm running AV software but my mail is not monitored by it.
>

Regardless of all the software you may use, you can only be really
protected from online attack by a thorough habit of self-defense.

DO NOT download from sites that cannot be trusted. And do not trust
easily. Your "friends" are your worst enemy in this regard, as they may
be naive or just plain malicious. A site that employs sleezey methods
(javascript, flash, etc) or can be uploaded to without proper screening,
is not a site to get anything from, whether you can screen it or not
(hackers are always working on ways to get past even the latest filters).

DO NOT accept mail or other transfers from anyone unless you know them,
are expecting it, and even then SCAN EVERYthing you get before opening it.

DO NOT let your email program execute anything, not even the opening of
a zip file, since the ext of a file in windows does not actually control
what the OS does with it (a zip file may actually be an exe file in
disguisse).

DO NOT run any activeX, Java Script (script is not actually java, it is
a microsoft invention, and is capable of doing horrendous damage if
turned full on), or (after a recent attack discussed in
news.admin.net-abuse.email) shockwave flash. If you want to watch
movies go get a DVD. All these things can do much damage to your
machine. If you do run a few JS functions you must run a proxy system
like proxomitron (no longer supported, but good, and there are others),
which allows you to finely tune what is allowed on your browser and what
is not. It stops popups, ads in general, and a lot of JS and html mischief.

Assume anything new from microsoft has bugs and unexpected ratware (you
find out what XP does behind your back, you will need a quick trip to
the toilet).

And do control your mail situation. This system ** costs me an extra
few bux a month, but I have received only 3 spams in the last two years
as a resilt. And remember, many spams carry virus/trojan/worm attacks
that can turn your machine into a zombie in control of the spammer, who
takes your bank account, your machine, your everything, and then pumps
his spam from your address from then on.

** http://www.seige-perilous.org/spam/spam-free.html

Protect yourself at all times from these few insane bastiges. The only
healthy attitude when it comes to computer defense is hardly any
different from paranoia. The result of this attitude is that the last
successful attack against me was back in 1997, a couple of winnukes
before I figgered out what it was and how to stop that. Your mileage
may vary.

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

"sdlfkj" <blah@blah.com> wrote in message
news:uXpYGf4UFHA.3280@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > >>>> I read that its redundent to have email scanning turned on
because
> > > >>>> of the resource load it places on the computer and that email is
> > > >>>> going to get scanned sooner or later anyways by other means.
Does
> > > >>>> that make sense to you people here?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Also, you can allows save any attachments and scan them manually,
> > > >>> if and when you are in doubt.
> > > >>
> > > >> I already do that. What this writer was saying was that scanning
> > > >> automatically doesn't improve security. I'm not worried about
> > > >> attachments as I already scan those with daily updated antivirus
> > > >> software. I'm worried about infections that can occur in the
> > > >> message body. I guess I'll go back to reading messages in Plain
> > > >> Text most of the time. Its kind of dull, but its sure safer.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I would say it does improve security because your system can be
> > > > compromised via scripts. But as I mentioned, if you have secured
> > > > your email client (Outlook Express I'm assuming) then it does become
> > > > redundant.
> >
> > > What does it mean......"secured your email client"?
> >
> > It means to lock the client down to prevent any exploits from taking
hold of
> > your PC. In the case of OE that means configuring the security settings
so
> > it uses the "Restricted site zones" and said zone is configured to not
allow
> > scripting, etc.
>
> That's what mine is set to as well. Thanks.
>

Your welcome!


Greg