From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] spam rejection after reception does have limits
Message-ID: <20030928141715.R27821@cackle.proxima.alt.za>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309271639250.7260-100000@maxroach.lanl.gov> <20030928101050.J27821@cackle.proxima.alt.za> <020001c3859e$d209f220$b9844051@insultant.net> <20030928114226.L27821@cackle.proxima.alt.za> <029701c385b0$686b32e0$b9844051@insultant.net> <20030928134701.P27821@cackle.proxima.alt.za> <02fb01c385b7$e6620a00$b9844051@insultant.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <02fb01c385b7$e6620a00$b9844051@insultant.net>; from boyd, rounin on Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 01:58:56PM +0200
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:17:16 +0200
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 52e92dc6-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 01:58:56PM +0200, boyd, rounin wrote:
>
> > Why bother?
>
> at the time i had a small concern about virii turning up in the dynamically
> loadable microcode.

Life was a lot easier for those of us who, like me, admired in
wonderment the behaviour of the ping-pong virus without giving it
much more of a thought because it had only so far affected the
computers of other, less sophisticated users.

I guess my security days started when my PC was eventually compromised
and I had to figure out what was going on.

++L