Security Basics mailing list archives
Re: 543.rar attachment
From: "David J ONEILL" <David.J.Oneill () state or us>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:18:48 -0800
Gee, why not just block ALL email communication. That would save you some work too. Archive files are a necessary part of communication and very beneficial in saving bandwidth. Let's have a reality check .... David J O'Neill Senior Systems Analyst State of Oregon Department of Human Services Office of Information Services PH# 503.378.2101 ext. 280 email david.j.oneill () state or us
Jonathan Loh <kj6loh () yahoo com> 03/14/05 02:21PM >>>
Ok that's a solution. But what I want to ask you is this. How much overhead does it take to do this? Blocking archive files would be an easier method with little overhead. Possibly with a reply to sender that your site does not accept archive files. --- Kinnell <kinnell.t () gmail com> wrote:
On the network I'm a member of we block all exe files sent inside
the
rar or zip, so even if it is sent the file will be 0byted. Wouldn't that be a better method? otherwise if you block all bz2, zip, rar, etc... then you will block a lot of useful communication -Kinnell On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:49:16 -0500, adisegna () siscocorp com <adisegna () siscocorp com> wrote:Sean, I have to disagree with you. Any file that that can
encapsulate an
executable file should be blocked (IMO). ZIP files are one of the biggest carriers of malicious content these days. I don't make it
a
habbit of trusting my users no matter how many times they get
trained.
RAR extraction tools are not part of the software image policy on
my
network so users are oblivious to the file blocking. What is your solution? Thanks AD Information Technology Group Security Identification Systems Corporation -----Original Message----- From: Sean Crawford [mailto:sean01 () accnet com au] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 9:39 PM To: security-basics () securityfocus com Subject: RE: 543.rar attachment ---> -----Original Message----- ---> From: adisegna () siscocorp com [mailto:adisegna () siscocorp com] ---> Subject: RE: 543.rar attachment ---> I just recently got the same executable inside .rar. I
extracted
the ---> dddd.exe and ran a scan on it. Norton Corporate 9.01 didn't
find
---> anything (as of 4 days ago). I wasn't about to double click
this
exe on ---> my corporate network. Block the rar extension on your mail
server.
---> rar is a valid compression format...blocking it isn't a very good solution. 2 cents. Sean
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
Current thread:
- Re: 543.rar attachment, (continued)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Thierry Zoller (Mar 07)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Andrew Pretzl (Mar 07)
- RE: 543.rar attachment Andrew Shore (Mar 07)
- RE: 543.rar attachment adisegna (Mar 08)
- RE: 543.rar attachment Sean Crawford (Mar 09)
- RE: 543.rar attachment adisegna (Mar 11)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Kinnell (Mar 14)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Steven DeFord (Mar 14)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Kinnell (Mar 14)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Jonathan Loh (Mar 14)
- RE: 543.rar attachment adisegna (Mar 14)
- Re: 543.rar attachment David J ONEILL (Mar 15)
- RE: 543.rar attachment Sean Crawford (Mar 16)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Jonathan Loh (Mar 15)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Kinnell (Mar 15)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Jonathan Loh (Mar 15)
- Re: 543.rar attachment SAMIR SHUKRI (Mar 16)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Kinnell (Mar 15)
- Re: 543.rar attachment David J ONEILL (Mar 15)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Jonathan Loh (Mar 15)
- Re: 543.rar attachment David J ONEILL (Mar 15)
- Re: 543.rar attachment Micro Kluge (Mar 16)
- FW: 543.rar attachment adisegna (Mar 16)