RE: Infected jpeg files?

From: Bruce Ediger (eballen1at_private)
Date: Fri Nov 09 2001 - 07:30:38 PST

  • Next message: Piyush Agarwal: "Re: vi buffer overflow"

    On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, OBrien, Brennan wrote:
    
    > Given that images are a major way of transmitting encoded data, it
    > stands to reason that the hooks could exist  -- that is, it could be a
    > transport mechanism.  However, the viewer itself would have to know to
    
    The view that "internet images transmit encoded data" is thoroughly
    discredited:  see http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/21829.html
    
    Some researchers examined two million images from eBay, and found not a
    single image containing steganographically encoded data. Primary source:
    http://www.citi.umich.edu/techreports/reports/citi-tr-01-11.pdf
    
    But that's neither here nor there in the context of whether the dopey IE
    warning about viruses in images is correct.
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Nov 09 2001 - 10:40:42 PST