m, said,
> This is not as pristinely true as it used to be. The problem is that the
> notion of "reading" mail has changed. When you "read" your mail using
> a POP server with a PC-based mail client, such as Eudora or Netscape,
> then the "reading" already entails both a downloading and, if the mail contains
> an attachment, a possible "execution" of the attachment as a program. So it is
> in fact conceivable that by reading your mail, in this updated sense, you will
> introduce a virus.
But aren't attachments closed files that would need to be opened in order to
activate a virus? Even if you agree to a prompt to save an attached file, it
seems that file would be inert until one opened it. If you trash an infected
file before opening it, it seems you should be safe.
reg
> This is not as pristinely true as it used to be. The problem is that the
> notion of "reading" mail has changed. When you "read" your mail using
> a POP server with a PC-based mail client, such as Eudora or Netscape,
> then the "reading" already entails both a downloading and, if the mail contains
> an attachment, a possible "execution" of the attachment as a program. So it is
> in fact conceivable that by reading your mail, in this updated sense, you will
> introduce a virus.
But aren't attachments closed files that would need to be opened in order to
activate a virus? Even if you agree to a prompt to save an attached file, it
seems that file would be inert until one opened it. If you trash an infected
file before opening it, it seems you should be safe.
reg