[olug] ASCII Ribbon Campaign

[Jeff Hinrichs]

Why not HTML mail?

1)Web Bugs
Every heard of them?  You make an HTML email with a graphic hosted on the
spammers server and mail it. Then when the user opens it, bam!.  A call to
the spammers server is made verifying your email address.
2)malcode
Mentioned in an earlier email.  Malicious code can be inserted and do bad
things. You don't even have to open your email if your running Virus
Express(OE), you just have to have auto-preview enabled.
3)Archivability
HTML is not the easiest thing to archive and search without jumping
through lots of hoops.
4)ability to hide s<!-- make filters break -->pam
You can insert HTML code to break up words in a message thus rendering
most filters useless.
5)Hides poor writing
If you have something to say, say it.  If it is worth reading it doesn't
need verdana, arial or some other font or graphic to make it look better.
6)It annoys vocal people
HTML mail haters are usually the most vocal of a group of people.  Sending
it is a sure way of getting a reply.  Probably not to the question you are
asking though.
7) Data leakage
If you are using a MUA that doesn't know how to safely handle HTML mail
you are at risk.  Might as well let everyone at work load Morpheus and
kazaa too.  Good thing we spent thousands on firewalls.
8)Personal Peril
If you do send HTML mail, I bet you use a M$ product to write it, which
means you are at risk.  When is the last time there was a mutt, Eudora,
mozilla virus/worm? Did you know if you are running XP pre sp1 it is
possible to send you an email that deletes your windows directory?

I'm sure that others can add to the list.  Not really a flame more of a
list of reasons why not to send it and why not to use a MUA that handles
it unsafely.   There are just too many vulnerabilities and evil
consequences to make it worth the risk.

-jeff

Nick Walter said:
> I'll risk being flamed till I'm crisp . . .
>
> I completely understand and agree with "Respect for open standards" and
> also "No M$ Word docs in e-mail".  I can't, however, quite agree with
> "No HTML/RTF in e-mail".  Both HTML and (theoretically) RTF are open
> formats that are well supported in a variety of O/Ss.  Using these
> formats is not contributing to anyone's evil monopoly or excluding a
> Linux/*BSD user from reading the document properly.  I myself send and
> receive quite a bit of HTML e-mail from the linux desktop I sit in front
> of for 8 hours a day at work, and have absolutely no problems reading it
> or sending it . . .
>
> Nick Walter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Timothy G. O'Brien" <IrishMASMS at netscape.net>
> To: <olug at olug.org>
> Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 9:48 PM
> Subject: [olug] ASCII Ribbon Campaign
>
>
>> /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
>> \ / Respect for open standards
>>  X  No HTML/RTF in e-mail
>> / \ No M$ Word docs in e-mail
>>
>>
>> HINT HINT = No HTML/RTF in e-mail
>> (what a mess if you are on the OLUG digest version...)
>>
>> --
>>   Timothy "Irish" O'Brien
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________ The
>> NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now!
> http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp
>>
>> Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at
> http://webmail.netscape.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> OLUG mailing list
>> OLUG at olug.org
>> http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug