From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chris Moore Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: C file recoginzed as image file Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 02:00:24 +0100 Message-ID: References: <45A427C9.9090702@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1168390859 25147 80.91.229.12 (10 Jan 2007 01:00:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:00:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lekktu@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, c.a.rendle@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 10 02:00:57 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H4Rph-0000oM-Uv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2007 02:00:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H4Rph-0007gt-AL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:00:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H4RpS-0007eu-Iw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:00:34 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H4RpS-0007ds-3i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:00:34 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H4RpR-0007db-PI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:00:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [66.249.92.171] (helo=ug-out-1314.google.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1H4RpR-0003ox-6b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:00:33 -0500 Original-Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j3so7508986ugf for ; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:00:29 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:to:cc:references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:x-sa-exim-connect-ip:x-sa-exim-mail-from:x-spam-checker-version:x-spam-level:x-spam-status:subject:x-sa-exim-version:x-sa-exim-scanned:sender; b=QZtVUOCfP4s2tI8o75Wrntdhkkf4ABkUPt0ju4tjD4RbHo/Z0v5nH4PammtNffb5tBj0W6RmSapJQfG9QUwArOwp2KNpjBPXWMOe996Zbc7xCqck0N/3MWkMQXhi9kFCiAa353MPAhrB3vI6+7G4XP0rSF7vGmvS0rcDxvkSRm8= Original-Received: by 10.67.101.10 with SMTP id d10mr35398652ugm.1168390828728; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:00:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from chrislap.local ( [89.176.28.156]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b35sm41589120ugd.2007.01.09.17.00.27; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:00:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=chrislap.local) by chrislap.local with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H4RpJ-0004Ov-2B; Wed, 10 Jan 2007 02:00:26 +0100 Original-To: "Lennart Borgman \(gmail\)" In-Reply-To: <45A427C9.9090702@gmail.com> (Lennart Borgman's message of "Wed\, 10 Jan 2007 00\:39\:53 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dooglus@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:23:22 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on chrislap.local) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:65097 Archived-At: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: > Chris Moore wrote: > >> In this case X/Y is 1/30,000,000 or so. Was it worth wasting all that >> time scanning 29,999,999 clean files to prevent just one virus being >> installed? What price is the average user willing to pay to prevent >> having their keypresses logged and transferred to a stranger, or to >> prevent their Internet banking details being stolen? > > Absolutely. The important figure here is 1. 1 virus found (or more). I just noticed - I think I may be been doing the same thing that annoyed Richard a couple of days ago; what he called "sarcastic". I don't mean to ask "was it worth wasting all that time ..." - of course it was. Seems I speak wih forked-tongue.