<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">What about all the PGP keys I see at the bottom of emails coming into my client from the list.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Which is neither linux or Microsoft based.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">No one ever seems to mention those!!</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Are they more acceptable than winmail.dat??</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Shawn</font>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Andrew Perrin <clists@perrin.socsci.unc.edu></b></font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: trilug-admin@trilug.org</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">06/26/2003 08:47 AM</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Please respond to trilug</font>
<br>
<td><font size=1 face="Arial"> </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> To: trilug <trilug@trilug.org></font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> cc: </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> Subject: Re: [TriLUG] OT: winmail.dat</font></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">Leaving aside the interpersonal politics here, winmail.dat is unwelcome<br>
because it's proprietary junk attached to messages. From memory, it's<br>
generated by one or more of those MS clients I've never used: outlook,<br>
exchange, ???... sorry, not bashing here, I just don't know which is<br>
which.<br>
<br>
There's a command-line decoder at http://sourceforge.net/projects/tnef/<br>
that can be used by either an admin or a user to decode the nasty little<br>
buggers.<br>
<br>
ap<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Andrew J Perrin - http://www.unc.edu/~aperrin<br>
Assistant Professor of Sociology, U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill<br>
clists@perrin.socsci.unc.edu * andrew_perrin (at) unc.edu<br>
<br>
<br>
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Jim Ray wrote:<br>
<br>
> what was the security problem with winmail.dat? a buddy of mine that<br>
> works for microsoft is interested in correcting the problem.<br>
><br>
> also, i looked at the trilug.org web site and pulled up one of my posts<br>
> with winmail.dat. it looked like a bunch of garbage. any way to get<br>
> the message back, or is it toast?<br>
><br>
> -----Forwarded Message-----<br>
> > From: Al Mulnick <amulnick@microsoft.com><br>
> > To: tee-discussion@yahoogroups.com<br>
> > Subject: RE: [tee-discussion] Delegate Control No Longer Working<br>
> > Date: 25 Jun 2003 23:17:11 -0400<br>
> ><br>
> Well, I'm not on corpnet at the moment, but let me have a look<br>
> tomorrow.<br>
><br>
> FWIW, winmail.dat is the format information. When you see MS-TNEF that<br>
> stands for Microsoft Transport Neutral Encapsulation Method.<br>
><br>
> I'd love to hear the argument that was used that said that winmail.dat<br>
> is a security threat and I'd love to hear the hack associated. That<br>
> would be good. MS-TNEF describes the formatting information for the<br>
> message. It's nothing more.<br>
><br>
> Jim, can you post the rest of the headers?<br>
><br>
> Al<br>
><br>
> ________________________________________________________________________<br>
> From: Jim Ray<br>
> Sent: Wed 6/25/2003 9:33 PM<br>
> To: tee-discussion@yahoogroups.com<br>
> Subject: RE: [tee-discussion] Delegate Control No Longer Working<br>
><br>
><br>
> could be. prolly some linux client like evolution. maybe it is time to<br>
> go back to elm or pine :-)<br>
><br>
> Content-Type: application/ms-tnef;<br>
> name="winmail.dat"<br>
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64<br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: Robin Krane [mailto:robin@computerconcept.com]<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 9:12 PM<br>
> To: tee-discussion@yahoogroups.com<br>
> Subject: RE: [tee-discussion] Delegate Control No Longer Working<br>
><br>
><br>
> could this winmail.dat have anything to do with MAC users. I<br>
> have a mac user that I noticed winmail.dat was attached, but not<br>
> my pc users<br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: Jim Ray [mailto:jim@neuse.net]<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:49 PM<br>
> To: tee-discussion@yahoogroups.com<br>
> Subject: RE: [tee-discussion] Delegate Control No Longer<br>
> Working<br>
><br>
><br>
> there's only one instance of store.exe. it is version<br>
> 6.0.6249.4.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">><br>
> best my eyes can tell, the only people that have<br>
> complained did so when i replied with OWA. no other<br>
> attachments exist.<br>
><br>
> i don't really know what winmail.dat is; however, this<br>
> one guy really got his panties in a wad over it and<br>
> cited security reasons.<br>
><br>
> meanwhile, the guy that got so upset spews these pgp<br>
> signature thingies with his every email that use more<br>
> bandwidth than my little ole winmail.dat.<br>
><br>
> so, yeah, if there's a way to get rid of it, i'd<br>
> definitely like to know. thanks, al.<br>
><br>
> btw, if anyone wants one of those 15 CD sets of all the<br>
> new microsoft server and office software, we'll have<br>
> some at the next tntug.org meeting on hp/compaq servers<br>
> and scripted installation.<br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: Al Mulnick [mailto:amulnick@microsoft.com]<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 12:41 PM<br>
> To: tee-discussion@yahoogroups.com<br>
> Subject: RE: [tee-discussion] Delegate Control<br>
> No Longer Working<br>
><br>
><br>
> Jim, I need more description to narrow this<br>
> down. Is the email generated a reply or a new<br>
> message? What version of store.exe are you<br>
> showing on the OWA and Exchange Server system<br>
> (are they the same?).<br>
><br>
> Is there an attachment other than winmail.dat<br>
> being attached?<br>
><br>
> Al<br>
><br>
> ________________________________________________<br>
> From: Jim Ray [mailto:jim@neuse.net]<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:37 AM<br>
> To: tee-discussion@yahoogroups.com<br>
> Subject: RE: [tee-discussion] Delegate Control<br>
> No Longer Working<br>
><br>
><br>
> basically, technet says sp3 takes care of<br>
> winmail.dat on exchange 2000 replies with OWA<br>
> given that sp3, indeed, is the latest service<br>
> pack. however, i have had complaints from<br>
> recipients that winmail.dat doth spew forth.<br>
><br>
> any help gratefully appreciated.<br>
><br>
><br>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<br>
> tee-discussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms<br>
> of Service.<br>
><br>
><br>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<br>
> tee-discussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of<br>
> Service.<br>
><br>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor<br>
><br>
><br>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<br>
> tee-discussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.<br>
><br>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor<br>
><br>
><br>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<br>
> tee-discussion-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.<br>
> --<br>
> Regards,<br>
><br>
> Jim Ray, Network Engineer<br>
> Neuse River Network, Inc.<br>
> 2610 Vanderbilt Ave<br>
> Raleigh NC 27607-7247<br>
> tel: 919-838-1672 x201<br>
> toll free: 800-617-7652<br>
> http://www.Neuse.Net<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> TriLUG mailing list<br>
> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug<br>
> TriLUG Organizational FAQ:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">> http://www.trilug.org/faq/TriLUG-faq.html<br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
TriLUG mailing list<br>
http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug<br>
TriLUG Organizational FAQ:<br>
http://www.trilug.org/faq/TriLUG-faq.html<br>
</font>
<br>
<br>