Text 5427, 299 rader
Skriven 2005-06-26 11:36:34 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 5424 av Geo (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: An Army of Soulless 1's and 0's
===========================================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_018A_01C57A43.4E1F2A70
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Now you give up on making false claims about safe and unsafe =
attachments. Are you incapable of admiting you are wrong?
Are you trying to suggest that someone that downloads a ZIP file, =
opens that file, opens something from that file, and then still ignores = the
warning about it being unsafe should blame any unwanted consequences = on whom,
you? How often do you infect yourself this way?
Rich
"Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message news:42beee3d@w3.nls.net...
not if it's in a zip file.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42beebc0@w3.nls.net...
To try to fool the few people like you that ignore all the other =
signs. When OE is configured to allow unsafe file types it displays the = .scr
extension even for the long path. It also displays the appropriate = icon
which for the example you give is an application icon not a JPEG = icon.
Outlook and OE still block it or warn about it depending on = settings. =20
Rich
"Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:42bec43b$1@w3.nls.net...
You don't believe the current UI with the way it displays an icon =
has had an effect?
Why then do email virus use such long attachment names?
Sheep.jpg =
.scr
explain that.
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42be1eb8@w3.nls.net...
The icons reflect the icons elsewhere in the UI. I believe =
this makes sense and do not believe that this UI consistency makes users = more
likely to make bad choices.
File extensions being hidden or not, and they are not on file =
attachments, is not the issue. I realize that this is a topic you like = to
whine about because you believe that your preference is right for = everyone.
Do you really believe the the clueless that ignore warnings = would pay
attention to this? This is all moot given that unsafe email = attachments are
blocked and the article was describing people = downloading from the web not
opening an attachment.
As for your claim to show a difference, this happens in a =
very obvious way. Users are warned about dangerous files and not warned =
about safe ones. The problem is that many ignore the warnings. This is = the
topic discussed in the email to which you replied and one which you =
completely ignored in your reply.
Rich
"Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:42be194e$1@w3.nls.net...
The answer is very simple, instead of hiding dangerous =
attachments, show the users that these are somehow different from other =
attachments, something as simple as changing the icon to a skull and =
crossbones. To make it so that profession users can't open an attachment =
without an exchange server is just plain rude.
The problem is MS has spent recent history trying to hide file =
extensions from the users, so now we have a bunch of clueless users when = it
comes to telling which file types are safe and which are not.
Geo.
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:42be015f@w3.nls.net...
I don't see an easy answer. The issue is not that users =
are warned when there is no reason too, it's that they got lucky. A = better
analogy than a combination lock is Russian roulette. It's always = dangerous
which is why there is a warning. What would you do?
On a related note, how do you make a user that just wants =
things to "work" and clicks OK because it doesn't "work" if he makes = another
choice to care about such choices? You can remove the choice = which is the
position taken with Outlook and dangerous attachments. = There were plenty
that complained including folks here when that = happened.
Rich
------=_NextPart_000_018A_01C57A43.4E1F2A70
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Now you give up on making =
false claims=20
about safe and unsafe attachments. Are you incapable of admiting = you
are=20
wrong?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Are you trying to suggest =
that someone=20
that downloads a ZIP file, opens that file, opens something from that = file,
and=20
then still ignores the warning about it being unsafe should blame any =
unwanted=20
consequences on whom, you? How often do you infect yourself this=20
way?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Geo" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote=20
in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42beee3d@w3.nls.net">news:42beee3d@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>not if it's in a zip =
file.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42beebc0@w3.nls.net">news:42beebc0@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> To try to fool the few =
people like=20
you that ignore all the other signs. When OE is configured to =
allow=20
unsafe file types it displays the .scr extension even for =
the long=20
path. It also displays the appropriate icon which for the =
example you=20
give is an application icon not a JPEG icon. Outlook and OE =
still=20
block it or warn about it depending on settings. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Geo" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42bec43b$1@w3.nls.net">news:42bec43b$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You don't believe the current UI =
with the way=20
it displays an icon has had an effect?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Why then do email virus use such =
long=20
attachment names?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2>Sheep.jpg &=
nbsp; &n=
bsp; &nb=
sp; &nbs=
p;  =
; =
&=
nbsp; =20
.scr</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>explain that.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Geo.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42be1eb8@w3.nls.net">news:42be1eb8@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> The icons reflect =
the icons=20
elsewhere in the UI. I believe this makes sense and do not =
believe=20
that this UI consistency makes users more likely to make bad=20
choices.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> File extensions =
being hidden=20
or not, and they are not on file attachments, is not the =
issue. I=20
realize that this is a topic you like to whine about because you =
believe=20
that your preference is right for everyone. Do you really =
believe=20
the the clueless that ignore warnings would pay attention to =
this? =20
This is all moot given that unsafe email attachments are blocked =
and the=20
article was describing people downloading from the web not =
opening an=20
attachment.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> As for your claim =
to show a=20
difference, this happens in a very obvious way. Users are =
warned=20
about dangerous files and not warned about safe ones. The =
problem=20
is that many ignore the warnings. This is the topic =
discussed in=20
the email to which you replied and one which you completely =
ignored in=20
your reply.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Geo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote =
in message=20
<A=20
=
href=3D"news:42be194e$1@w3.nls.net">news:42be194e$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The answer is very simple, =
instead of=20
hiding dangerous attachments, show the users that these are =
somehow=20
different from other attachments, something as simple as =
changing the=20
icon to a skull and crossbones. To make it so that profession =
users=20
can't open an attachment without an exchange server is just =
plain=20
rude.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The problem is MS has spent =
recent=20
history trying to hide file extensions from the users, so =
now we=20
have a bunch of clueless users when it comes to telling which =
file=20
types are safe and which are not.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Geo.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:42be015f@w3.nls.net">news:42be015f@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I don't see an =
easy=20
answer. The issue is not that users are =
warned=20
when there is no reason too, it's that they got =
lucky. A=20
better analogy than a combination lock is Russian =
roulette. =20
It's always dangerous which is why there is a warning. =
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What would you =
do?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> On a related =
note, how do=20
you make a user that just wants things to "work" and clicks =
OK=20
because it doesn't "work" if he makes another choice to care =
about=20
such choices? You can remove the choice which is the =
position=20
taken with Outlook and dangerous attachments. There =
were=20
plenty that complained including folks here when that=20
happened.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOC=
KQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_018A_01C57A43.4E1F2A70--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|