Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:17:24 -0800
From:      Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>
To:        Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net>
Cc:        Nils Holland <nils@tisys.org>, postmaster@daimi.au.dk, security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: VIRUS IN YOUR MAIL 
Message-ID:  <200110291617.f9TGHsd04697@cwsys.cwsent.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:04:40 %2B0200." <20011029190440.A584@straylight.oblivion.bg> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20011029190440.A584@straylight.oblivion.bg>, Peter Pentchev 
writes:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 04:58:06PM +0100, Nils Holland wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 postmaster@daimi.au.dk wrote:
> > 
> > >                            V I R U S  A L E R T
> > >
> > > Our viruschecker found the
> > >
> > > 	'W32/Klez'
> > >
> > > virus(es) in your email to the following recipient(s):
> > >
> > > -> <FARRET@DAIMI.AU.DK>
> > 
> > This is probably (no, definately!) off-topic, but I have seen these damn
> > eMail virus scanners running havoc several times. If a virus gets send to
> > a crowsed mailing lists, such warnings as the one above can occur *in the
> > hundreds* (yes, I have counted). taking that into account, I thought that
> > eMail worms were so bad because when they spread themselves, they caused a
> > lot of network badwith to be used. Now, I wonder if there's any difference
> > in the badwidth being used by the worm virus/worm spreading, or by the
> > virus scanners sending out their warning messages...
> 
> The problem is not virus scanners per se, the problem is *broken* virus
> scanners which do not send their automated replies to the right address.
> They are supposed to honor the Return-Path in the message header, and
> send all automated replies to a special Majordomo alias (owner-listname),
> which swallows them and takes note of which subscriber sends the most
> of these.  At some point, I think automatic unsubscription takes place,
> but even if it does not, mail sent to owner-listname does not reach
> the list.
> 
> Now go explain all of this to the scanners' writers.  Apparently,
> everyone who has tried so far has failed :(

I agree that there is no proactive way to resolve this, however there 
is a reactive approach that will resolve the recurring nature of the 
problem, that being to put subscriber email addresses in the bounces 
list until the problem is resolved.  This may not be a P.C. solution 
but I think it will work until a better solution is found.


Regards,                         Phone:  (250)387-8437
Cy Schubert                        Fax:  (250)387-5766
Team Leader, Sun/Alpha Team   Internet:  Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca
Open Systems Group, ITSD
Ministry of Management Services
Province of BC




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200110291617.f9TGHsd04697>