From: Ellen K. 

OK, I'll buy that, although it's putting a very fine point on it.

On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 00:17:50 -0800, "Rich"  wrote in message
:

>   No.  Something is unsafe if it has the potential to be harmful.  Mike is
trying to make the claim that unsafe is synonymous with harmful.  The
content determines if something is harmful.  The extension determines if
something is unsafe.
>
>Rich
>
>  "Ellen K."  wrote in message
news:k9hb011rtr0siv8c7h75cq20inh11d7gkc{at}4ax.com...
>  I think Rich was just making a verbal shortcut, meaning "files with
>  extensions predefined as unsafe".
>
>  On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 17:01:13 -0500, Mike '/m'  wrote in
>  message :
>
>  >
>  >It is the content, not the extension, that determines whether or not a file
is
>  >safe.
>  >
>  >  /m
>  >
>  >On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 17:34:44 -0800, "Rich"  wrote:
>  >
>  >>   What everyone I know does if they need to send unsafe
files by email is
to rename them to have a "safe" extension and to send that.  The
recipient saves it and renames it back.
>  >>
>  >>   There are administrator controls but this comes up so rarely I can't
remember when the last person asked.
>  >>
>  >>Rich
>  >>
>  >>  "Ellen K." 
wrote in message
news:a8n4015isr1b71cf9vemdkp9t6eh5pbtd2{at}4ax.com...
>  >>  Which brings us back to the nasty question of, to what extent should
>  >>  users be protected against their own stupidity?  If
Microsoft let these
>  >>  through, people would say they are impairing security.   In
fact users
>  >>  clicking on attachments has been one of the biggest ways
viruses spread.
>  >>
>  >>  I'm wondering whether the Help File posted below has an alternative,
>  >>  since the behavior described is labelled the
"default"... i.e. this name
>  >>  implies that some other possibility also exists.  Rich?
>  >>
>  >>  On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 22:10:58 -0500, Mike '/m'
 wrote in
>  >>  message :
>  >>
>  >>  >
>  >>  >That feature has converted some friends away from
Outlook to another,
any
>  >>  >other, email client.  They cannot understand why the
email client does
not
>  >>  >allow them access to what is sent to them.
>  >>  >
>  >>  > /m
>  >>  >
>  >>  >
>  >>  >On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 20:08:20 -0600, "Robert G Lewis"

>  >>  >wrote:
>  >>  >
>  >>  >>Ah HA
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>From the Help File 
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>a.. By default, Microsoft Outlook blocks attachment
files ( such as
.bat,
>  >>  >>.exe, .vbs, and .js) that can contain viruses. You
cannot see or
access the
>  >>  >>attachments. Your Inbox will display the paperclip
icon in the
Attachment
>  >>  >>column to let you know that the message has an
attachment, and you
will see
>  >>  >>a list of the blocked attachment files in the
InfoBar at the top of
your
>  >>  >>message. If you try to open the attachment by
right-clicking the item,
View
>  >>  >>Attachments will not appear on the shortcut menu.
If you need to use
files,
>  >>  >>such as .exe files, from others, have them post the
files to a network
share
>  >>  >>or to a Web share that you can access.
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>Except it doesn't show in the inforbar and .MSO is
not listed as a
blocked
>  >>  >>file in Outlook 2002 so ......
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>"Geo"  wrote in
message news:42017edd$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>  >>  >>> "Robert G Lewis"
 wrote in message
>  >>  >>> news:42016ab0$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>  >>  >>>
>  >>  >>>> I'm right clicking on the Inbox message
list for that email and can
view
>  >>  >>> or
>  >>  >>>> open the attachment, I don't see the
attachment in either preview
or
>  >>  >>> opened
>  >>  >>>> email.
>  >>  >>>
>  >>  >>> Excellent, just what I was looking for, thanks.
>  >>  >>>
>  >>  >>> Geo.
>  >>  >>>
>  >>  >>>
>  >>  >>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5