Re: Trojan horse Downloader.Generic.ML
From: Ron Reaugh (ron-reaugh_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 06:57:53 GMT
"Roger Wilco" <email@example.com> wrote in message
> "Ron Reaugh" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> > "Roger Wilco" <email@example.com> wrote in message
> > news:firstname.lastname@example.org...
> > >
> > > "Ron Reaugh" <email@example.com> wrote in message
> > > news:DHmte.firstname.lastname@example.org...
> > >
> > > > > (it is not executable
> > > >
> > > > WHO SAYS? Where there's code there's a possible fire.
> > >
> > > Right - hence my QBASIC "text" file scenario. If I wrote a batchfile
> > > that fed that textfile to the QBASIC interpreter, then the batchfile
> > > would be the trojan threat - not the "text" file itself.
> > YES, the text file itself is and I'd expect a good checker to find
> > eliminate it if it was in fact part of a multistepped
> A "trojan" is a program - and a text file is not a program - therefore a
> text file is not a trojan.
Wacko....a trojan is a pentration. It makes no difference if it's a wooden
horse or a wolf in sheeps clothing.
> You profess to prefer logic, so there it is.
Did you plunk your magic plonker froggie?