Subject: Re: [Fwd: Virus Alert]

From: "Daniel Lynes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 00:30:10 +0700

On Wed, 21 Aug 1996 02:59:43 +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:

>Vi and clones aren't completely safe, either. In some circumstances, at
>least, they load a .exrc (and/or .vimrc or whatever) from the current

Well, I don't use vi under Linux; only under DOS and OS/2.  The Linux
version (Debian installation, anyways) doesn't work as I expect it to. 
The 'vi' that I use under DOS and OS/2 is Watcom's hacked version of
vi.  As such, it uses totally different configuration files.  At the
moment, I only use vi to view files...for the editting, I use joe. 
However, if I could change vi's behaviour to act more like the Watcom
vi (a la the vi configuration in Slackware), I would use it instead of
joe, as I'm more familiar with vi, and vi doesn't require all these
obtuse WordStar keystrokes to write files, or get out of the editor. :(

>The point is that you should know your tools (rtfm, very thoroughly), and
>make sure they don't have these gotchas enabled.

I usually don't have any automatic processing enabled, with one
exception:  my BBS software.  When mail comes in, it automatically
processes it as a detached process.  However, it doesn't do anything
different from one instance to the other, dependent on what's in the
messages.

Another instance of the autoaction messes, is the old tintin++.  If you
had a certain autoaction enabled on it, someone could tell your
character to log off of the MUD, and you would. :)  (Found that one out
the hard way, using tintin/2 0.99.)  The porter is nowhere to be found,
however.

>I pointed out comp.risks before, I think, but it's good enough that it
>can be repeated: read comp.risks. If you enjoy horror movies, you should
>really like comp.risks. Or if your mine is as twisted as mine, you could
>view it as a funnier replacement of rec.humor.funny.

I would probably view it more as funny, than horror.  Although, you
sort of have to feel sorry for these poor buggers. :)  One such string
of events I can think of, is when Seagate starting shipping all their
new EIDE drives with the EZ-Drive software.  My boss was one of those
people that were too cheap to upgrade their systems to take advantage
of the LBA translation tables.  As a result, he decided to install the
EZ-Drive software that came on his drive.  Voila!  Instant Microsoft
software.  It destroyed his hard drive.  Took that drive back, got
another Seagate Decathlon.  Destroyed that one with the same software. 
Got it replaced again, and swapped it to me for my Maxtor.  He hasn't
had a problem since, and I'm much happier with an 850mb mode 4 over a
540mb mode 3. :)  The only method of getting that software off of the
drive, is by doing ezdrive /wipeboottrack.  However, Seagate neglected
to mention that this undocumented parameter also destroys the hard
drive. :)