FromTheRafters said:
Errr....no it wasn't. The problem is that the program using the data
did more than "just read" it. Just reading an e-mail still cannot infect
you, but some e-mail clients do more than "just read" the data ~ they
read and interpret some of it as instructions.
There is a difference between what people consider "just reading" an
e-mail. and what programmers consider "just reading" a file. E-mail
is a textual data file, and you cannot get infected by "just reading" it.
Yes Sugien, I realize that it is what the average person thinks that
really matters to you on this subject, and not what the terms really
mean, but it is the same with the terms "open" and "execute" ~ you
cannot get infected by just opening an attachment either - it is when
you execute it that that happens. You can "open" a file for reading
or writing (think editor) without executing it. To the average person
the act of "opening" an attachment is equivalent to execution, but
that isn't really the case.
As long as MP3 files are treated as data only, they will not be
able to infect - or be considered infectable themselves.
That is just a long winded way to say *nothing* ;because even the most
virulent virus there is can be opened in a hexeditor safely and not infect
the user. What maters more then the quote unquote *correct* terms is what
the average user thinks; because it isn't the experts that indirectly slow
down the internet or get infected because of their using correct
terminology; but rather the average user that gets confused when the so
called experts start bandying about the term and say that they *can NOT* get
infected by just reading an email and then the average user after using
their email client that has the ability to parse and execute scripts inside
a html email *does* infect them and then their system starts sending out to
other average users that likewise have been confused by the *experts* that
have said they *can NOT* get infected by just reading an email that the
whole internet community expert and average user alike pay the price because
of the experts wanting to use *precise terms*
When you and others get off this kick of trying to call things by the
expert terminology then maybe the average users won't get so confused;
because to the average users just reading an email *will* infect them;
because to them it is just reading an email even if the email client they
are using to "just read" the email is executing scripts contained in the
html portion of the email, after all even html is *just text* that is
interpreted by the email program or browser even a script is *just text*
that is interpreted. An email client could even be written that could take
plane text and interpret it and when the email client sees the text *infect*
it could, well I think you get the point.
p.s.
after my re-reading my reply I can see how some may think my reply is a
heated reply; but it is not in anger or any such thing, just that I get
tired of people telling users over and over that they can't get infected by
just reading an email and then the new user thinks they are safe and they
read an email and their email client is set to parse and execute embedded
scripts and they get infected which is bad for everyone on the net.
ino-Soft Software::::::>