spumoni_fettuccini's Journal: My 2 cents on Gmail.

I'll probably be using my Gmail account for normal use and not just for a spam trap as many people I have heard state, both RL and /. Here is a very good article that I believe expresses all the salient points on why I will be using Gmail.
Now I'm not trying to convert anybody and any counter arguments and views are more than welcome. In my view what they're doing is just not that bad and there is nothing very different about what they are doing than what others have been doing for years.
The ads themselves, so far, only show up once in a while and are no different than what you see on the side when doing a Google search. I don't know if this ad once in 5 or so e-mails is just because it didn't always find any appropriate keyword(s) or if it is by design and, as I understand it, only the Gmail user ever sees any ads.
Found this in the help:
As a security measure to prevent potential viruses, Gmail does not allow you to receive executable files (such as files ending in .exe) that could contain damaging executable code. Gmail does not accept these types of files, even if they are sent in a zipped (.zip, .tar, .tgz, .taz, .z, .gz) format. If someone tries to send this type of message to your Gmail account, the message will be bounced back to the sender.
Oh that's music to my ears! I hope they consider adding a few others, say .com, .vbs, etc. Kind of a tough call on denying .zip files though, that's gonna' suck for any dialup users. Yahoo has recently started making users scan before they download and if a virus is found they are blocked from downloading it. Unfortunately there is still a small window of opportunity for a virus to slip through. At our office our users get access to Yahoo...must...not...start...separate..rant... and that has gotten us in the shorts a couple of times.

zip

[turg]

I don't think they're blocking all zip files -- just zipped files that contain an executable.

Also, note that is says "such as files ending in .exe" which suggests that it's not only .exe but others also.

Re:zip

[bubblegoose]

I wonder what happens if you encrypt your zip file...I'll have to try it.

Re:zip

[bubblegoose]

They bounce encrpyted zip files, just tested it.

Re:zip

[insanecarbonbasedlif]

What if you rename your zip to something, like .jpg?

Re:zip

[bubblegoose]

Good call.

I made a zip file consisting of one .exe file. Changed the extension of the .zip to .jpg and it went through.

I also made an encrypted .zip file consisting of one .exe file. Changed the extension to .jpg and it also went through.

Re:zip

[spumoni_fettuccini]

Yeah, meant to add that question to the JE and bubblegoose beat me to the test. It was my hope that this would be the way it worked. I think it's going to cut down on people just clickity-clickitying their way into a virus.

Re:zip

[spumoni_fettuccini]

The way I understood was .zip and .zip files in zipped files and bubblegoose [slashdot.org] gave it a test run and proved it, with something that I had hoped to be true. You can change the extension to jpg [and I imagine txt, wmv, wav etc] and get it through. Makes it just a bit more difficult for someone to infect their machine and someone that is expecting/needing one of those types will be able to receive it.

Just tested .com and .vbs, Hmmmm sent one with a .com [just a txt file remaned] and a second with .vbs [same]

Looking at that extention list, I suspect that

[RLiegh]

their motives aren't so much having to do with security, as much as it is bandwidth. Still, it would be handy to be able to send my-latest-OSS-project-src.tar.gz in my email, and I don't blame them for not wanting to host and/or transfer large files... ...but I do wish that they'd be a little more direct (or honest, depending on your point of view) about it.