I'm heading to the website in just a minute.. I have to use Mike's puter to do that right now.. I'm trying to burn some CD's and am having a fit with it.. arghhhh.... letcha know what happens... LOL ginger At 03:53 PM 5/20/00 -0500, you wrote: >Ginger, the web site will tell you the latest version. > >Mari Mike & Ginger Woodcock/EagleRun Australian Shepherds [email protected] http://www.eaglerun1.com Ginger's WebDesign is here to help with your Web Needs, Give us a call, or email with your questions. Remember, the purchase of an EagleRun Aussie is not the end of a Transaction, it is the Beginning of a Relationship, enjoy!! :-)

At 01:52 PM 5/20/2000 -0700, [email protected] wrote: > >>Final opinion: >> >>1) Norton has a slight edge over McAfee in the ability to detect viruses, >> trojans, or worms; >>2) Norton releases new DAT files much quicker than McAfee; >>3) Norton causes conflicts on many systems when using Windows; >>4) McAfee, when releasing new DAT files, always waits until the >> programmers have perfected the detecting ability of McAfee for >> the new virus/trojan/worm; >>5) McAfee, if you use the Web-Page applications/utilities, is >> far superior to Norton in ease of use; >>6) McAfee is much easier to integrate with other Windows >> programs that you may be using. >> >>My choice? McAFEE! >> >>SgtGeorge > >Ummmm....but my Norton doesn't conflict?! Course, I have Windows 98.... > >Mari Just a note from a Norton User ~~ I've had no problems on this computer and have used Norton AV for over a year. Now, Norton CrashGuard was another story, took care of that by uninstalling it. Used McAfee with a previous computer and had nothing but problems. But of course, that is just my humble opinion. Rene'

LOL and sometimes I answer a post too late....and before I read the next one! Mari At 11:20 AM 5/20/00 -0500, Mike & Ginger Woodcock wrote: >Gee, I'm so sorry, I deleted this post, but it must have gone out while I >was striking the "big D"... so sorry.. >I found the version number as I was typing.. I sometimes skim too fast and >miss something important.. :-(.... > >ginger >Mike & Ginger Woodcock/EagleRun Australian Shepherds >[email protected] http://www.eaglerun1.com >Ginger's WebDesign is here to help with your Web Needs, >Give us a call, or email with your questions. >Remember, the purchase of an EagleRun Aussie is not the end >of a Transaction, it is the Beginning of a Relationship, enjoy!! :-) > > >============================== >Join the RootsWeb WorldConnect Project: >Linking the world, one GEDCOM at a time. >http://worldconnect.genealogy.rootsweb.com/

Ginger, the web site will tell you the latest version. Mari At 10:25 AM 5/20/00 -0500, Mike & Ginger Woodcock wrote: >Ok, > >Mike just came in and said that will work, but what is the latest >version. He would rather buy it local so we actually have the CD....So, >what version should we look for..? > >Also, what do you know about PC cillin, it came with my AMD Athlon... I'm >curious.. > >Thanks so much.. > >ginger > >Mike & Ginger Woodcock/EagleRun Australian Shepherds >[email protected] http://www.eaglerun1.com >Ginger's WebDesign is here to help with your Web Needs, >Give us a call, or email with your questions. >Remember, the purchase of an EagleRun Aussie is not the end >of a Transaction, it is the Beginning of a Relationship, enjoy!! :-) > > >============================== >Free Web space. ANY amount. ANY subject. >RootsWeb's Freepages put you in touch with millions. >http://cgi.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/acctform.cgi

One thing to add. George has touched on it...but most of the time these programs that "come as a package" even with Eudora....are either outdated, or only watered down versions. I never use these programs...always buy the full boxed program. Costs more, but you'll never be sorry! Mari At 02:23 AM 5/20/00 -0400, George W. Durman wrote: >An admitted prejudiced opinion: > >1) Uninstall Norton; >2) The OEM version of McAfee is no good now! Bite the bullet and go to > McAfee's home page and pay for the latest version, 5.1. >3) I don't know why you couldn't install the OEM version of McAfee, but > in any case, it was probably 3.0, which won't help you much. > >This is just my OPINION. Not to be taken as "gospel". I've just had so >much trouble with Norton, that I won't try ANYTHING that this company puts >out. Norton products just don't work well with Windows, whether 95, 98, >or 2000. (Major conflicts with the "code".) > >SgtGeorge > > >At 12:02 AM 05/20/2000, Mike & Ginger Woodcock wrote: >*************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* >At 10:56 PM 5/19/00 -0400, you wrote: >At 02:21 PM 05/19/2000, Mike & Ginger Woodcock wrote: >*************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* >Thanks so much George. I truly appreciate all you do and all your caring. >I'm just back after a near fatal attack of virus'. Had to be in the shop >for 4 days.. but, all reformatted and clean now.. geesh... Opinions >please.. what is the VERY best virus scanner out... > >**************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** > >Oh, gosh! Don't ask me which virus scanner is the best! No matter which >one I recommend, some will consider me prejudiced. Back in the very early >days of computers (pre-1990), and for a few years after, I used McAfee and >Norton and F-Prot and Dr. Solomon and several others. > >George > > >LOLOL.... Ok, had you in the hot seat.. now another question. > >I have Norton AV version 4.0 > >And McAfee OEM internet version that came with my Eudora.. I can't >remember the version and it is not installed on my puter... > >When I last tried to install it, it gave an error message saying it could >not install. I'm wondering if it is not compatible with my AMD Athlon. > >I need to install something immediately and want to do it only ONCE.. LOLOL > >So, Stg George... what shall I do.. > >ginger >**************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** > >============================== >Free Web space. ANY amount. ANY subject. >RootsWeb's Freepages put you in touch with millions. >http://cgi.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/acctform.cgi

At 10:56 PM 5/19/00 -0400, George W. Durman wrote: >Final opinion: > >1) Norton has a slight edge over McAfee in the ability to detect viruses, > trojans, or worms; >2) Norton releases new DAT files much quicker than McAfee; >3) Norton causes conflicts on many systems when using Windows; >4) McAfee, when releasing new DAT files, always waits until the > programmers have perfected the detecting ability of McAfee for > the new virus/trojan/worm; >5) McAfee, if you use the Web-Page applications/utilities, is > far superior to Norton in ease of use; >6) McAfee is much easier to integrate with other Windows > programs that you may be using. > >My choice? McAFEE! > >SgtGeorge Ummmm....but my Norton doesn't conflict?! Course, I have Windows 98.... Mari

> > >Ok, > >Mike just came in and said that will work, but what is the latest >version. He would rather buy it local so we actually have the CD....So, >what version should we look for..? > >Also, what do you know about PC cillin, it came with my AMD Athlon... I'm >curious.. > >Thanks so much.. > >ginger Gee, I'm so sorry, I deleted this post, but it must have gone out while I was striking the "big D"... so sorry.. I found the version number as I was typing.. I sometimes skim too fast and miss something important.. :-(.... ginger Mike & Ginger Woodcock/EagleRun Australian Shepherds [email protected] http://www.eaglerun1.com Ginger's WebDesign is here to help with your Web Needs, Give us a call, or email with your questions. Remember, the purchase of an EagleRun Aussie is not the end of a Transaction, it is the Beginning of a Relationship, enjoy!! :-)

At 02:23 AM 5/20/00 -0400, you wrote: >An admitted prejudiced opinion: > >1) Uninstall Norton; >2) The OEM version of McAfee is no good now! Bite the bullet and go to > McAfee's home page and pay for the latest version, 5.1. >3) I don't know why you couldn't install the OEM version of McAfee, but > in any case, it was probably 3.0, which won't help you much. > >This is just my OPINION. Not to be taken as "gospel". I've just had so >much trouble with Norton, that I won't try ANYTHING that this company puts >out. Norton products just don't work well with Windows, whether 95, 98, >or 2000. (Major conflicts with the "code".) > >SgtGeorge Ok, I have a serious question here.. :-) I had not put Norton on the puter yet.. I just got it back from the shop because of the damage done by the recent bugs.. I had lost some Windows files and corrupted others.. I did install McAfee 3.1.1....... I shut down this am for something and it took 20 minutes to come up after the reboot... The last time I installed McAfee 3.1.1 on my puter was when I got it home brand new... I've always used McAfee. The only difference is my new puter is an AMD Athlon. So, is there a problem with McAfee and this new unit. I uninstalled 3.1.1 and rebooted.. It came right up.. just as it should have before. Is it something I'm doing or is my puter going to cause me an early death.. :-) HELP..................LOL ginger Mike & Ginger Woodcock/EagleRun Australian Shepherds [email protected] http://www.eaglerun1.com Ginger's WebDesign is here to help with your Web Needs, Give us a call, or email with your questions. Remember, the purchase of an EagleRun Aussie is not the end of a Transaction, it is the Beginning of a Relationship, enjoy!! :-)

At 02:23 AM 5/20/00 -0400, you wrote: >An admitted prejudiced opinion: > >1) Uninstall Norton; >2) The OEM version of McAfee is no good now! Bite the bullet and go to > McAfee's home page and pay for the latest version, 5.1. >3) I don't know why you couldn't install the OEM version of McAfee, but > in any case, it was probably 3.0, which won't help you much. > >This is just my OPINION. Not to be taken as "gospel". I've just had so >much trouble with Norton, that I won't try ANYTHING that this company puts >out. Norton products just don't work well with Windows, whether 95, 98, >or 2000. (Major conflicts with the "code".) > >SgtGeorge Ok, Mike just came in and said that will work, but what is the latest version. He would rather buy it local so we actually have the CD....So, what version should we look for..? Also, what do you know about PC cillin, it came with my AMD Athlon... I'm curious.. Thanks so much.. ginger Mike & Ginger Woodcock/EagleRun Australian Shepherds [email protected] http://www.eaglerun1.com Ginger's WebDesign is here to help with your Web Needs, Give us a call, or email with your questions. Remember, the purchase of an EagleRun Aussie is not the end of a Transaction, it is the Beginning of a Relationship, enjoy!! :-)

At 10:25 AM 5/20/00 -0500, you wrote: >At 02:23 AM 5/20/00 -0400, you wrote: >>An admitted prejudiced opinion: >> >>1) Uninstall Norton; >>2) The OEM version of McAfee is no good now! Bite the bullet and go to >> McAfee's home page and pay for the latest version, 5.1. >>3) I don't know why you couldn't install the OEM version of McAfee, but >> in any case, it was probably 3.0, which won't help you much. >> >>This is just my OPINION. Not to be taken as "gospel". I've just had so >>much trouble with Norton, that I won't try ANYTHING that this company >>puts out. Norton products just don't work well with Windows, whether 95, >>98, or 2000. (Major conflicts with the "code".) For the most part I agree with Master George, but I must disagree at a low level with him on Norton. They did have some problems, but when we (work group I just retired from) started to chase the problems down, we came upon problems beyond Nortons short fall from grace. I have run a system for over four years now updating from Win31 to Win311, Win95 (three versions), Win98 and now Win98SE. This was done to try to track problems with the over 50 systems we looked out for. I am about to have to kill the system after all these years, not because I do not believe I could extent it for at least one more major change, but because it is a early Pentium 266, and has gotten so slow, that I have to get a whiz giz system to work on the new projects I have gotten. (One other thing, it started as a 90mag pent, and was upgraded to the 266 after we found a way to do so). On this system as well as others, we found the main problem with Anti-Virus programs, was not the particular brand name, or installation. The biggest problem was people trying to use two or three brands of AV at the same time. Even though they did not run them simultaneously as a rule, many of these programs load a "loader" string of code into the stack at startup. These could interfere with each other. It got to where we had to demand that the user completely delete the old program before installing the new, this included the information in the register for the old program. This is not a job for the casual computer user. I was lucky to have a person who lived and breathed windows to do this. My suggestion for those who have tried two or three programs, to either do a new clean install of windows about every six months, (really a pain), or learn how to clean the registry before trying any new programs which are as hard on the system as the AV programs are. There are several programs available that will watch every thing that happens when you try (install) a new program, and will help you completely clean the old out before starting the new. This is the best way, but are hard to use, and you have to make a choice on the removal before any more programs are installed. Good luck, Jack

I was convinced it was Eudora - the addresses were 100% correct - and uninstalled/reinstalled. Problem persisted. Then I found out it was using one ISP to collect mail from a second ISP. That is blocked. so - NOT a Eudora fault. 1. Is there a way of unblocking this? (new ISP is much cheaper on telephone time costs) 2. I lost my Registration (with Eudora) in the process. I have the e-mails from Eudora confirnming my registration. How do I unblock this without creating two registrations at Qualcomm? David

An admitted prejudiced opinion: 1) Uninstall Norton; 2) The OEM version of McAfee is no good now! Bite the bullet and go to McAfee's home page and pay for the latest version, 5.1. 3) I don't know why you couldn't install the OEM version of McAfee, but in any case, it was probably 3.0, which won't help you much. This is just my OPINION. Not to be taken as "gospel". I've just had so much trouble with Norton, that I won't try ANYTHING that this company puts out. Norton products just don't work well with Windows, whether 95, 98, or 2000. (Major conflicts with the "code".) SgtGeorge At 12:02 AM 05/20/2000, Mike & Ginger Woodcock wrote: *************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* At 10:56 PM 5/19/00 -0400, you wrote: At 02:21 PM 05/19/2000, Mike & Ginger Woodcock wrote: *************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* Thanks so much George. I truly appreciate all you do and all your caring. I'm just back after a near fatal attack of virus'. Had to be in the shop for 4 days.. but, all reformatted and clean now.. geesh... Opinions please.. what is the VERY best virus scanner out... **************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** Oh, gosh! Don't ask me which virus scanner is the best! No matter which one I recommend, some will consider me prejudiced. Back in the very early days of computers (pre-1990), and for a few years after, I used McAfee and Norton and F-Prot and Dr. Solomon and several others. George LOLOL.... Ok, had you in the hot seat.. now another question. I have Norton AV version 4.0 And McAfee OEM internet version that came with my Eudora.. I can't remember the version and it is not installed on my puter... When I last tried to install it, it gave an error message saying it could not install. I'm wondering if it is not compatible with my AMD Athlon. I need to install something immediately and want to do it only ONCE.. LOLOL So, Stg George... what shall I do.. ginger **************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT**************

Folks, I've been trying for almost a half hour to forward you the warning I received from McAfee about this Virus/Trojan. I have so much protection on my system now, that when I try to view or send an email that contains the three letters "Vee-Bee-Ess", I get kicked out of Eudora immediately. Talk about protection! In any case, since I can't seem to send the email, here's the URL for viewing what McAfee has to say about this latest thing: http://www.mcafee.com/anti-virus/viruses/newlove/ I think the problem is with the latest ZoneAlarm. It must be so "picky" that when it sees "Vee-Bee-Ess" it shuts down my email program! This one is for real! Don't click on an attachment that ends in "Vee-Bee-Ess", and make sure you have the latest DAT files for your Anti-Virus program, plus make sure you have the latest ZoneAlarm. SgtGeorge (P.S. Just read another email from ZDNet and found out that all the major AV programs have released a DAT file for this new abomination. Just log on to the web site for whatever AV program you use and download whatever is recommended.)

Hi, I just found out about this list and am new. I have Eudora ver. 3 and was wondering if there were any updates. I have no problem with Eudora 3 but my sister wants a spell checker. Thanks, Sonja http://www.familytreemaker.com/users/p/h/i/Sonja-R-Phipps/

At 03:28 PM 05/19/2000, David Lewin wrote: *************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* I have just attempted to send mail via a new ISP. What does <Dominant>, 1 message left to send., RCPT TO: <e-mail address> mean? I have never seen outgoing messages stick. In the lefthand margin, the queueing sign changed to a "torn" letter icon David Lewin **************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** "Dominant" means your "default" or "main" Personality. When outgoing messages "stick", it is usually because the TO: address has a problem. The "torn" letter icon means that there is a problem in sending the email, and that you have to "stop the transfer", i.e., right-click and choose "stop". In other words, you tried to send an email to an address that is not recognized by your SERVER. Has nothing to do with Eudora. Eudora is only letting you know that the server refused to send your email because there is a problem with the format of the address. Examples: To: [email protected]> (see the trailing ">", with no beginning "<"?) "somebody [email protected] (a " before SOMEBODY, but no closing " after SOMEBODY) "GoodUserName" <[email protected]> (the domain name is mis-spelled) Your ISP, "bigfoot.com" must use the same protocol as does any "good" ISP, and looks at the @whoever.com part of the address before sending on the message. If the domain (@whoever.com) is not valid, it can cause your outgoing email to "stick". Happens to me occasionally. I highlight, copy, and paste, but fail to get all the email address. SgtGeorge

At 10:56 PM 5/19/00 -0400, you wrote: >At 02:21 PM 05/19/2000, Mike & Ginger Woodcock wrote: >*************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* >Thanks so much George. I truly appreciate all you do and all your caring. >I'm just back after a near fatal attack of virus'. Had to be in the shop >for 4 days.. but, all reformatted and clean now.. geesh... Opinions >please.. what is the VERY best virus scanner out... > >**************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** > >Oh, gosh! Don't ask me which virus scanner is the best! No matter which >one I recommend, some will consider me prejudiced. Back in the very early >days of computers (pre-1990), and for a few years after, I used McAfee and >Norton and F-Prot and Dr. Solomon and several others. George LOLOL.... Ok, had you in the hot seat.. now another question. I have Norton AV version 4.0 And McAfee OEM internet version that came with my Eudora.. I can't remember the version and it is not installed on my puter... When I last tried to install it, it gave an error message saying it could not install. I'm wondering if it is not compatible with my AMD Athlon. I need to install something immediately and want to do it only ONCE.. LOLOL So, Stg George... what shall I do.. ginger Mike & Ginger Woodcock/EagleRun Australian Shepherds [email protected] http://www.eaglerun1.com Ginger's WebDesign is here to help with your Web Needs, Give us a call, or email with your questions. Remember, the purchase of an EagleRun Aussie is not the end of a Transaction, it is the Beginning of a Relationship, enjoy!! :-)

At 02:21 PM 05/19/2000, Mike & Ginger Woodcock wrote: *************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* Thanks so much George. I truly appreciate all you do and all your caring. I'm just back after a near fatal attack of virus'. Had to be in the shop for 4 days.. but, all reformatted and clean now.. geesh... Opinions please.. what is the VERY best virus scanner out... ginger Ginger, am sending the file to your private email address. Look for the message. It will contain the file "Edit-X-Headers.zip". The file has been checked and is virus-free! George **************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** Oh, gosh! Don't ask me which virus scanner is the best! No matter which one I recommend, some will consider me prejudiced. Back in the very early days of computers (pre-1990), and for a few years after, I used McAfee and Norton and F-Prot and Dr. Solomon and several others. F-Prot HAD to be the best AV program available at the time! Unfortunately, they didn't continue development and got left by the wayside. Dr. Solomon was an excellent program, but was bought out by McAfee, and is now incorporated into its suite of programs. Ever since the majority of users started using Windows, Norton caused massive "conflict" problems with Windows; as late as a year ago, Norton was still causing the same conflicts. I stopped using Norton when Windows 95 and Norton kept causing me much grief. So, I guess I have to give some kind of definitive answer here. Having gone through almost a decade and a half of "computering", and having experienced just about all of the AV programs (not saying that any of them give ABSOLUTE satisfactory performance), I would have to say that McAfee has been the one that devoted the most time and money to creating an "acceptable" AV program. (The U.S. Navy adopted McAfee as their AV program years ago, as did the Eastman corporation. That must mean something!) I think that the next wave of AV products will be much like what McAfee is now offering - making available a suite of AV utilities, all accessed from McAfee's web site, where, once the user pays the registration fee, one need not download any DAT files, and can do all their AV business "online". For the reason in the above paragraph, I would have to say that McAfee is on the right track and will probably be the foremost in the AV business in the future. As to which AV program finds the most viruses, trojans, worms, etc., take your pick between McAfee and Norton; both incorporate the latest virus/trojan/worm signatures in their DAT files. As to which comes out the quickest with new DAT files to counter brand-new viruses/trojans/worms, Norton is usually several days ahead of McAfee; however, speed is not always of the utmost importance. Sometimes, waiting a couple of days in order to release a "good fix" means more than releasing a "quick fix", which has to be followed up later with a "good fix". As to which is the easiest to configure and use, it depends on which you have been using, and which you are the most familiar with. If you're a "newbie", the simplest to use is McAfee. If you worry about conflicts in Windows with your AV program, use McAfee until Norton works out (after several years of problems) how to write code that doesn't cause crashes in Windows. Final opinion: 1) Norton has a slight edge over McAfee in the ability to detect viruses, trojans, or worms; 2) Norton releases new DAT files much quicker than McAfee; 3) Norton causes conflicts on many systems when using Windows; 4) McAfee, when releasing new DAT files, always waits until the programmers have perfected the detecting ability of McAfee for the new virus/trojan/worm; 5) McAfee, if you use the Web-Page applications/utilities, is far superior to Norton in ease of use; 6) McAfee is much easier to integrate with other Windows programs that you may be using. My choice? McAFEE! SgtGeorge

At 12:41 PM 05/19/2000, David Lewin wrote: *************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* Your help is invaluable - as always. Thank you. I must revert to all this at a later stage - am off for a little while DL. **************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** David, wish I could afford to be "off for a little while". Some people have all the luck. (GRIN) When you return, don't hesitate to ask questions. We're always available for helping. LONG LIVE EUDORA! SgtGeorge

At 12:36 PM 05/19/2000, David Lewin wrote: *************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* (snip) love the "guess" paragraphs - How human!! I never knew computers have the capacity to guess David **************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** Hi David. Don't rejoice too much. Just wait until you save an email with the "Guess Paragraphs" option, then read it later. (GRIN) It might make you wonder what the Eudora programmers consider a "paragraph". SgtGeorge

(From Listowner: This is one you really need to download and install! The information that Microsoft puts out is "for the birds"! Those "gomers" just won't admit the fact that there ARE serious flaws in ALL MS products when it comes to security! It really ticks me off when they make a statement like this: "Machines protected by a proxy server or a firewall that drops fragmented packets would not be affected by this vulnerability." That's a bunch of bull! My machine is protected by an excellent "firewall", ZoneAlarm. Yet, this "IP Fragment Assembly" got me early Friday morning. I awoke to see the "Blue Screen of Death". ZoneAlarm tried to prevent it, but even the best firewall can't handle EVERYTHING that MS forgot to include in Windows! We just have to wait and hope that MS "wakes up" and "gets it". BTW, I just had to reboot to get back to normal.) (In this forwarded email, you can't click on the links that are provided; you have to highlight and copy them, then paste into the address space in your web browser.) SgtGeorge ************************* The following is a Security Bulletin from the Microsoft Product Security Notification Service. Please do not reply to this message, as it was sent from an unattended mailbox. ******************************** -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Microsoft Security Bulletin (MS00-029) - -------------------------------------- Patch Available for "IP Fragment Reassembly" Vulnerability Originally Posted: May 19, 2000 Summary ======= Microsoft has released a patch that eliminates a security vulnerability in Microsoft(r) Windows(r) 95, Windows 98, Windows NT(r) 4.0 and Windows 2000. The vulnerability could be used to cause an affected machine to temporarily stop performing useful work. Frequently asked questions regarding this vulnerability and the patch can be found at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/fq00-029.asp Issue ===== The affected systems contain a flaw in the code that performs IP fragment reassembly. If a continuous stream of fragmented IP datagrams with a particular malformation were sent to an affected machine, it could be made to devote most or all of its CPU availability to processing them. The data rate needed to completely deny service varies depending on the machine and network conditions, but in most cases even relatively moderate rates would suffice. The vulnerability would not allow a malicious user to compromise data on the machine or usurp administrative control over it. Although it has been reported that the attack in some cases will cause an affected machine to crash, affected machines in all Microsoft testing returned to normal service shortly after the fragments stopped arriving. Machines protected by a proxy server or a firewall that drops fragmented packets would not be affected by this vulnerability. The machines most likely to be affected by this vulnerability would be machines located on the edge of a network such as web servers or proxy servers. Affected Software Versions ========================== - Microsoft Windows 95 - Microsoft Windows 98 - Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 Workstation - Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 Server - Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 Server, Enterprise Edition - Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 Server, Terminal Server Edition - Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional - Microsoft Windows 2000 Server - Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server Patch Availability ================== - Windows 95: http://download.microsoft.com/download/win95/update/8070/w95/EN-US/259728USA5.EXE - Windows 98: http://download.microsoft.com/download/win98/update/8070/w98/EN-US/259728USA8.EXE - Windows NT 4.0 Workstation, Server and Server, Enterprise Edition: http://www.microsoft.com/Downloads/Release.asp?ReleaseID=20829 - Windows NT 4.0 Server, Terminal Server Edition: http://www.microsoft.com/Downloads/Release.asp?ReleaseID=20830 - Windows 2000 Professional, Server and Advanced Server: http://www.microsoft.com/Downloads/Release.asp?ReleaseID=20827 Note: Line breaks have been inserted into the URLs above for readability. Note: Additional security patches are available at the Microsoft Download Center More Information ================ Please see the following references for more information related to this issue. - Frequently Asked Questions: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS00-029, http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/fq00-029.asp - Microsoft Knowledge Base article Q259728 discusses this issue and will be available soon. - RFC 791, Internet Protocol, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0791.txt?number=791 - Microsoft TechNet Security web site, http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/default.asp Obtaining Support on this Issue =============================== This is a fully supported patch. Information on contacting Microsoft Technical Support is available at http://support.microsoft.com/support/contact/default.asp. Acknowledgments =============== Microsoft thanks Bindview's RAZOR Security Team (http://www.bindview.com) for reporting this issue to us and working with us to protect customers. Revisions ========= - May 19, 2000: Bulletin Created. - ---------------------------------------------------- THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE MICROSOFT KNOWLEDGE BASE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. MICROSOFT DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT SHALL MICROSOFT CORPORATION OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER INCLUDING DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF MICROSOFT CORPORATION OR ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. SOME STATES DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES SO THE FOREGOING LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY. Last updated May 19, 2000 (c) 2000 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of use. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.0.2 iQEVAwUBOSXSiI0ZSRQxA/UrAQEJxQf+Mkw36xigL/G2YKxP7G4BoBgt5HFGBvsL koWn2E3lgP9Xy1UnG24epLLjwW7w8lwasviSYBjMA5XOU3lqhTTWOTMjh5qY5/V0 8cnjeQOSUQxL4NO5c4nNLHkDBRlBeWNfEiFahb5+XOakaIwpiaBbS0WqI9ojY3Nh fsp4MBOcjFmcI0h9Mw4yPF62FeEyYubp5CojLk8cn2gPsJrSMMvtW9CX8lhNyTrB DqpUNhkwgddXk4hVuAFT37WJWcTp7mgtTeTtKH67z/NzXkkOHld25vOvZPtgl1Zn bAkcSU0CV4Af91flq0Uxp5s40DduVl1TY9l+mHosSClVyImS0ouOrQ== =wC2m -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ******************************************************************* You have received this e-mail bulletin as a result of your registration to the Microsoft Product Security Notification Service. You may unsubscribe from this e-mail notification service at any time by sending an e-mail to [email protected] The subject line and message body are not used in processing the request, and can be anything you like. To verify the digital signature on this bulletin, please download our PGP key at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/notify.asp. For more information on the Microsoft Security Notification Service please visit http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/notify.asp. For security-related information about Microsoft products, please visit the Microsoft Security Advisor web site at http://www.microsoft.com/security.