In article >,
"righter" > wrote:

> "DVD Doc" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 05:17:53 GMT, "righter" > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Old Nick" > wrote in message
> > .. .
> > >> On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 22:03:26 GMT, Screener1 >
> > >> vaguely proposed a theory
> > >> ......and in reply I say!:
> > >> remove ns from my header address to reply via email
> > >>
> > >> Bee in bonnet.
> > >>
> > >> Don't be too derisive about the infected.
> > >>
> > >> I "trialled" one of these attachments. I ran a latest update (that
> > >> day's) virus checker over it (CA's AV)...clean. Then I checked it with
> > >> updated malware checkers...clean. I had a firewall running. I started
> > >> the trojan. It broke straight through the firewall, even wehn
> > >> completely blocked, and although the firewall could "see" the trojan
> > >> programme, it simply generated no traffic. I had all sorts of reasons
> > >> and excuses from the makers of the firewall.............ecepe that
> > >> another firewall _did_ catch the trojan every time.
> > >
> > >Amazing. Thanks for the warning, I don't have that kind of expertise to
> > >remedy a situation like that.
> >
> > Just don't click on anything that looks so stupid from the header
> > anyway
>
or before downloading, fire up google and type in the name of whatever
it is, often if it is a virus it will bring up the security releases
about it.