Worm storms

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Julian V. Noble, Sep 24, 2003.

  1. Dear C Mavens,

    Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?

    I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    I have gotten well over 10K such messages.


    --
    Julian V. Noble
    Professor Emeritus of Physics

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/~jvn/

    "Science knows only one commandment: contribute to science."
    -- Bertolt Brecht, "Galileo".
     
    Julian V. Noble, Sep 24, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Julian V. Noble

    Ian Tuomi Guest

    Julian V. Noble wrote:

    > Dear C Mavens,
    >
    > Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >
    > I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    > I have gotten well over 10K such messages.
    >


    Yes. I am getting ~200/day but I made mozilla identify them as spam and
    not download any attachments bigger than 50k so they are quickly deleted

    --
    Ian Tuomi
    Jyväskylä, Finland

    "Very funny scotty, now beam down my clothes."

    GCS d- s+: a--- C++>$ L+>+++$ E- W+ N+ !o>+ w---
    !O- !M- t+ !5 !X R+ tv- b++ DI+ !D G e->+++ h!

    NOTE: Remove NOSPAM from address
     
    Ian Tuomi, Sep 24, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Re: OT: Worm storms

    Ian Tuomi <> writes:

    > Julian V. Noble wrote:
    >
    >> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    >> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox? I
    >> neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel I have
    >> gotten well over 10K such messages.

    >
    > Yes. I am getting ~200/day but I made mozilla identify them as spam
    > and not download any attachments bigger than 50k so they are quickly
    > deleted


    For me, these two procmail rules got the signal/noise ratio down to
    levels manageable by Gnus. (But then I was getting more like ~1000
    messages/day for a few days there).

    :0 B
    * ^Content-Type:.application/(msword|(x-)?msdownload|vnd.ms-[aptw].*)
    {
    LOG="[worm] "

    :0
    /dev/null
    }

    :0 B
    * ^Content-Transfer-Encoding:.*base64
    * ^TVqQAAMAAAAEAAAA//8AALg
    * 4fug4AtAnNIbg
    {
    LOG="[worm] "

    :0
    /dev/null
    }

    --
    Björn Lindström <>
    http://bkhl.elektrubadur.se/

    Hearken to the new *Elektrubadur* demo at http://elektrubadur.se/
     
    =?iso-8859-1?q?Bj=F6rn_Lindstr=F6m?=, Sep 24, 2003
    #3
  4. On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Julian V. Noble wrote:

    > Dear C Mavens,
    >
    > Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >
    > I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    > I have gotten well over 10K such messages.


    I used to get less than a dozen a day so I never worried about spoofing my
    return address. As you can see, I now spoof my return address. I'm getting
    around 500 a day now. I didn't read my email over the weekend and had over
    1300 messages waiting for me.

    If you are on a Unix box you can look into using procmail to filter your
    incoming.

    > --
    > Julian V. Noble
    > Professor Emeritus of Physics
    >
    > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    > http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/~jvn/
    >
    > "Science knows only one commandment: contribute to science."
    > -- Bertolt Brecht, "Galileo".
    >


    --
    darrell at cs dot toronto dot edu
    or
    main(){int j=1234;char t[]=":mad:abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz.\n",*i=
    "iqgbgxmdbjlgdv.lksrqek.n";char *strchr(const char *,int);while(
    *i){j+=strchr(t,*i++)-t;j%=sizeof t-1;putchar(t[j]);} return 0;}
     
    Darrell Grainger, Sep 24, 2003
    #4
  5. Julian V. Noble

    Aggro Guest

    [OT] Re: Worm storms

    Julian V. Noble wrote:
    > Dear C Mavens,
    >
    > Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?


    You are off topic here, but it is propably Swen that you are seeing,
    read more about it for example from here:

    http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/swen.shtml
     
    Aggro, Sep 24, 2003
    #5
  6. purpose and usage of 'restricted' was: Re: Worm storms

    On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:22:05 +0300, Ian Tuomi wrote:

    > Julian V. Noble wrote:
    >
    >> Dear C Mavens,
    >>
    >> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    >> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >>
    >> I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    >> I have gotten well over 10K such messages.


    I got suprised one day as it turned out that I had ~200 messagess waiting
    for me. The bad thing is that I have *slow* connection and those messages
    were simply killing my system. I had 100+ of sendmails hanging around and
    waiting forever for the mail to arrive.

    To be topical: what is the keyword "restricted" for, how old is it? I've
    noticed a couple of people giving little hints that it's for telling the
    programmer/compiler it's illegal to pass the same thing more than once. I
    dont know if I got it correctly or is it just my imagination working.
    Anyway what is the reason for such a construct? The olny example I could
    think of was something like memcpy - memove (it's a little slopy, I know
    it's not exactly the same).
    Fell free to correct me

    Zygmunt
     
    Zygmunt Krynicki, Sep 24, 2003
    #6
  7. Julian V. Noble

    Malcolm Guest

    Re: purpose and usage of 'restricted' was: Re: Worm storms

    "Zygmunt Krynicki" <zyga@_CUT_2zyga.MEdyndns._OUT_org> wrote in message
    > To be topical: what is the keyword "restricted" for, how old is it? I've
    > noticed a couple of people giving little hints that it's for telling the
    > programmer/compiler it's illegal to pass the same thing more than once.
    >

    Say we've got the following function

    int mean(int *data, int N, int *err)
    {
    /* add up the data, if you get an overflow then set err */
    }

    The problem comes when err points to one of the data elements pointed to by
    data. This is obviously pathological from the point of view of a human
    programmer who knows the intent of the function, but to the compiler it is
    legal C.
    The need to handle pointer aliasing may make it difficult to optimise the
    function. For instance, if integers are four bytes but the architecture
    allows 8 bytes to be read from memory at one cycle, the compiler cannot take
    advantage of this because of the possibility that a write to *err has
    invalidated the second data item.
     
    Malcolm, Sep 24, 2003
    #7
  8. Julian V. Noble wrote:

    > Dear C Mavens,
    >
    > Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >
    > I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    > I have gotten well over 10K such messages.
    >

    I do get emails from Swen infected users, to my one and only public
    email address, probably collected from c.l.c when I was posting without
    mangling it. For some reason, though, I do not get any unmanageable
    amount :-/ Maybe 50 emails tops since last friday...

    --
    Bertrand Mollinier Toublet
    "In regard to Ducatis vs. women, it has been said: 'One is a sexy thing
    that you've just got to ride, even if it breaks down a lot, costs a lot
    of money, and will probably try to kill you'. However, nowadays I can't
    seem to remember which one is which." -- Peer Landa
     
    Bertrand Mollinier Toublet, Sep 24, 2003
    #8
  9. Julian V. Noble

    Simon Biber Guest

    "Julian V. Noble" <jvn-at-virginia.edu> wrote:
    > Dear C Mavens,
    >
    > Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >
    > I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    > I have gotten well over 10K such messages.


    Since 2003/9/18 I have received about 4000 copies of the worm
    Swen.A. That's about 600 megabytes added to my monthly quota :(

    I think a lot of people on comp.lang.c are affected according to a bounce message I received:

    ---
    The file (part0004:q834994.exe) attached to mail (with subject: Current Net Critical Pack) sent by
    sales.dep-at-xnet.ro to jens.toerring-at-physik.fu-berlin.de, 80bluesky-at-gmx.at,
    calum.bulk-at-ntlworld.com, jacob.navia-at-jacob.remcomp.fr, thomas.pfaff-at-tiscali.no,
    nicole0169-at-citiz.net, christian.bau-at-cbau.freeserve.co.uk, sbiber-at-optushome.com.au,
    foo.foo-at-gmx.net, debashis_kolkata-at-rediffmail.com, nimel-at-passagen.se, a.litowka-at-gmx.de,
    gah-at-ugcs.caltech.edu, gin-at-binky.homeunix.org, dagwyn-at-null.net, mambuhl-at-earthlink.net,
    mason_verger-at-skincare.com, lawrence.jones-at-eds.com, klachemin-at-home.com,
    pyf-at-mail.zjitc.net, nzanella-at-cs.mun.ca, francischeng-at-hong-kong.crosswinds.net,
    jcook-at-strobedata.com, emonk-at-slingshot.co.nz.no.uce, pushkar-at-erc.msstate.edu,
    lfw-at-airmail.net, binary-at-eton.powernet.co.uk, airia-at-acay.com.au, chris-at-sonnack.com,
    kst-at-cts.com, derkgwen-at-hotpop.com, dontmail-at-address.co.uk.invalid, mkwahler-at-mkwahler.net,
    os2guy-at-pc-rosenau.de, richmond-at-ev1.net, horpner-at-yahoo.com, nglen702-at-netscape.net,
    stewart.brodie-at-ntlworld.com, ayeameen-at-yahoo.com, parinioa-at-hotmail.com,
    malcolm-at-55bank.freeserve.co.uk, joewwright-at-earthlink.net, m_donaghy50-at-hotmail.com,
    robertvazan-at-privateweb.sk, kevin.bracey-at-tematic.com, dan.pop-at-cern.ch, thadsmith-at-acm.org,
    nethlek-at-tokyo.com, koster_thomas-at-yahoo.com.sg, ajo-at-andrew.cmu.edu,
    first.last-at-company.com, aurer-at-axis.com, palaste-at-cc.helsinki.fi, eric.sosman-at-sun.com,
    msgregoryz-at-earthlink.net, kers-at-hpl.hp.com, d99alu-at-efd.lth.se, cmccormick-at-mailsnare.net,
    chrisval-at-bigpond.com.au, kuyper-at-saicmodis.com, deliberately-at-made.invalid,
    ak+usenet-at-freeshell.org, irrwahn-at-freenet.de, xal-at-abowers.combase.com,
    s030768-at-student.dtu.dk, pfiland-at-mindspring.com, scs-at-eskimo.com, noizetogo-at-direct.ca,
    glenhallick-at-sprint.ca, cdvanos-at-telus.net, n36170-at-hotmail.com, me-at-here.com,
    danmc-at-shaw.ca, magpie-at-shinythings.com, keimdf-at-softek-net.com is infected with virus:
    Win32/Swen.A-at-mm.
    ---

    (@ replaced with -at- in this message to try to prevent this
    email list from being picked up by spambots.)

    --
    Simon.
     
    Simon Biber, Sep 24, 2003
    #9
  10. Re: purpose and usage of 'restricted' was: Re: Worm storms

    In article
    <pan.2003.09.24.21.21.18.477679@_CUT_2zyga.MEdyndns._OUT_org>,
    "Zygmunt Krynicki" <zyga@_CUT_2zyga.MEdyndns._OUT_org> wrote:

    > On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:22:05 +0300, Ian Tuomi wrote:
    >
    > > Julian V. Noble wrote:
    > >
    > >> Dear C Mavens,
    > >>
    > >> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > >> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    > >>
    > >> I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    > >> I have gotten well over 10K such messages.

    >
    > I got suprised one day as it turned out that I had ~200 messagess waiting
    > for me. The bad thing is that I have *slow* connection and those messages
    > were simply killing my system. I had 100+ of sendmails hanging around and
    > waiting forever for the mail to arrive.


    Recommendation: Use Mozilla Firebird. It lets you choose "don't download
    messages over xx Kilobyte", so it downloads only about 1KB of each of
    these messages and then you can delete them.

    > To be topical: what is the keyword "restricted" for, how old is it? I've
    > noticed a couple of people giving little hints that it's for telling the
    > programmer/compiler it's illegal to pass the same thing more than once.


    It is there since C99. There are two uses:

    1. If you use a pointer like "int * restrict p", then it is undefined
    behavior if you modify an object through an expression that is derived
    from the value of p, and access it through a different pointer; and it
    is also undefined behavior if you access an object through an expression
    that is derived from the value of p, and access it modify it through a
    different pointer.

    This is important for an optimising compiler. Example:

    int *restrict p;
    int *q;

    int x = *q, y;
    *p = 2;
    y = *q;

    The compiler can assume that y == x because the assignment to *p cannot
    change *q (if it did you would have violated the first rule).

    2. If you use a pointer like "const int * restrict p", then it is
    undefined behavior if you modify an object that is accessed through an
    expression that is derived from the value of p. In other words, *p
    cannot be modified as long as the pointer p exists. Usually, if you have
    a const* pointer then the object pointed to can still be modified by
    other means, or by casting the const-ness away. Not if it is a const
    *restrict pointer.

    > I dont know if I got it correctly or is it just my imagination working.
    > Anyway what is the reason for such a construct? The olny example I could
    > think of was something like memcpy - memove (it's a little slopy, I know
    > it's not exactly the same).
     
    Christian Bau, Sep 24, 2003
    #10
  11. "Simon Biber" <> wrote:

    >"Julian V. Noble" <jvn-at-virginia.edu> wrote:
    >> Dear C Mavens,
    >>
    >> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    >> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >>
    >> I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    >> I have gotten well over 10K such messages.

    >
    >Since 2003/9/18 I have received about 4000 copies of the worm
    >Swen.A. That's about 600 megabytes added to my monthly quota :(
    >
    >I think a lot of people on comp.lang.c are affected according to a bounce message I received:
    >

    <who-is-who in c.l.c snipped>

    Just what I thought. I had to re-route the traffic to the address I
    used when posting here to /dev/null, after receiving about forty virus-
    or bounce-messages per hour. The new alias redirects to a working
    spam-free account (after removing the capitals).

    Irrwahn
    (currently using his old 14.4K Hayes Optima on a flaky phone line)
    --
    Close your eyes and press escape three times.
     
    Irrwahn Grausewitz, Sep 24, 2003
    #11
  12. Julian V. Noble

    Ravi Guest

    On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:22:05 +0300, Ian Tuomi <> wrote:

    >Julian V. Noble wrote:
    >
    >> Dear C Mavens,
    >>
    >> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    >> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >>
    >> I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    >> I have gotten well over 10K such messages.
    >>

    >
    >Yes. I am getting ~200/day but I made mozilla identify them as spam and
    >not download any attachments bigger than 50k so they are quickly deleted


    Are you saying that inspite of mangling your address with nospam you get the spam messages?

    --
    main(){char s[19]="SbwjCAUpvhiHvz/ofu";
    int i;for(i=0;i<18;putchar(s[i++]-1));}
     
    Ravi, Sep 25, 2003
    #12
  13. Julian V. Noble

    Jason Guest

    > Dear C Mavens,
    >
    > Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >
    > I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    > I have gotten well over 10K such messages.
    >

    I get about 100 mails every day :(
     
    Jason, Sep 25, 2003
    #13
  14. Re: purpose and usage of 'restricted' was: Re: Worm storms

    Christian Bau <> spoke thus:

    > 1. If you use a pointer like "int * restrict p", then it is undefined
    > behavior if you modify an object through an expression that is derived
    > from the value of p, and access it through a different pointer; and it
    > is also undefined behavior if you access an object through an expression
    > that is derived from the value of p, and access it modify it through a
    > different pointer.


    > This is important for an optimising compiler. Example:


    > int *restrict p;
    > int *q;


    > int x = *q, y;
    > *p = 2;
    > y = *q;


    (I'm assuming you ommitted the calls to malloc() for simplicity...)

    > The compiler can assume that y == x because the assignment to *p cannot
    > change *q (if it did you would have violated the first rule).


    So basically the restrict keyword means that p may not share write access to a
    given area of memory with another pointer?

    > 2. If you use a pointer like "const int * restrict p", then it is
    > undefined behavior if you modify an object that is accessed through an
    > expression that is derived from the value of p. In other words, *p
    > cannot be modified as long as the pointer p exists. Usually, if you have
    > a const* pointer then the object pointed to can still be modified by
    > other means, or by casting the const-ness away. Not if it is a const
    > *restrict pointer.


    So restrict is a way of forcing strict const-ness?

    --
    Christopher Benson-Manica | Jumonji giri, for honour.
    ataru(at)cyberspace.org |
     
    Christopher Benson-Manica, Sep 25, 2003
    #14
  15. Re: OT: Worm storms

    On 24 Sep, in message <>
    (Björn Lindström) wrote:

    >Ian Tuomi <> writes:
    >
    >> Julian V. Noble wrote:
    >>
    >>> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    >>> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox? I
    >>> neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel I have
    >>> gotten well over 10K such messages.

    >>
    >> Yes. I am getting ~200/day but I made mozilla identify them as spam
    >> and not download any attachments bigger than 50k so they are quickly
    >> deleted

    >
    >For me, these two procmail rules got the signal/noise ratio down to
    >levels manageable by Gnus.


    [snip]

    From Message-ID <bkmdsh$fan$> on
    comp.sys.acorn.misc the following procmail recipe will catch the virus
    itself, but not the faked bounces - I've had none since installing it on
    my ISPs server.

    :0
    * > 140000
    * < 165000
    {
    :0 BD
    * b3IAAABBZG1pbgAAAEdFVCBodHRwOi8vd3cyLmZjZS52dXRici5jei9iaW4vY291bnRlci5naWYv
    /dev/null
    }

    FYI: that string contains a base64-encoded URL of a vanity counter that
    the virus apparently has hard-coded in it

    Yours,

    Phil L.
    --
    http://www.philipnet.com http://director.sourceforge.net
    The From address is valid, but anything over 32k is deleted by the server
    i ou a uea i e a o ie e a o a a oue oae
     
    Philip Ludlam, Sep 25, 2003
    #15
  16. Re: purpose and usage of 'restricted' was: Re: Worm storms

    In article <bkupfv$ot9$>,
    Christopher Benson-Manica <> wrote:

    > So basically the restrict keyword means that p may not share write access to a
    > given area of memory with another pointer?


    Slightly more. As you said, only one pointer is allowed to write in that
    area. But if one of the pointers writes, then the other pointer is not
    even allowed to read from the same area.

    That allows an optimising compiler to reorder read and write accesses
    through both pointers.

    > > 2. If you use a pointer like "const int * restrict p", then it is
    > > undefined behavior if you modify an object that is accessed through an
    > > expression that is derived from the value of p. In other words, *p
    > > cannot be modified as long as the pointer p exists. Usually, if you have
    > > a const* pointer then the object pointed to can still be modified by
    > > other means, or by casting the const-ness away. Not if it is a const
    > > *restrict pointer.

    >
    > So restrict is a way of forcing strict const-ness?


    By using const + restrict, _you_ guarantee to the compiler that nothing
    will try to change an object, as long as the const+restrict pointer
    variable exists. As soon as the const+restrict pointer variable
    disappears, you are allowed to modify the object again, unless it is
    really const, of course. For example, if a function argument is a
    const+restrict pointer, and you pass the address of an object to that
    function, then you can modify the object again after the function call
    is finished.
     
    Christian Bau, Sep 25, 2003
    #16
  17. in comp.lang.c i read:
    >> Dear C Mavens,


    >> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    >> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    >>
    >> I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    >> I have gotten well over 10K such messages.
    >>

    >I get about 100 mails every day :(


    a spoofed from header is against my custom. things have calmed down a
    little, so i only get around 150 per minute of these swen worms.

    --
    a signature
     
    those who know me have no need of my name, Sep 26, 2003
    #17
  18. Julian V. Noble

    Joe Wright Guest

    those who know me have no need of my name wrote:
    >
    > in comp.lang.c i read:
    > >> Dear C Mavens,

    >
    > >> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > >> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    > >>
    > >> I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    > >> I have gotten well over 10K such messages.
    > >>

    > >I get about 100 mails every day :(

    >
    > a spoofed from header is against my custom. things have calmed down a
    > little, so i only get around 150 per minute of these swen worms.
    >

    I get about 50 an hour. Apparently Verisign is doing it to us. They
    handle the DNS for .com and .net domains for the entire Internet. Sven
    is emailed from non-existent domains and used to be effectively blocked
    by anti-spam software which would look up Sven's domain, not find it and
    therefore reject the email. Now that no longer works. Verisign's DNS
    returns 'found' signal for all domains since early last week. Part of
    their SiteFinder feature.

    They are being sued. They have to be stopped.
    --
    Joe Wright mailto:
    "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
    --- Albert Einstein ---
     
    Joe Wright, Sep 26, 2003
    #18
  19. in comp.lang.c i read:

    [re: the swen worm and it's bounces]

    >I get about 50 an hour. Apparently Verisign is doing it to us.


    only indirectly. the worm doesn't synthesize a (potentially non-existent)
    domain, it uses the domains present in e-mail addresses it finds in msoe's
    local cache, some of which will be invalid yet within .com or .net, so some
    of the messages might have been rejected by some mta's were it not for the
    wildcard.

    --
    a signature
     
    those who know me have no need of my name, Sep 26, 2003
    #19
  20. In article <>,
    those who know me have no need of my name <>
    wrote:

    > in comp.lang.c i read:
    > >> Dear C Mavens,

    >
    > >> Anyone here getting hosts of spam with nefarious attachments,
    > >> purporting to be from M$ or its lackeys, into your mailbox?
    > >>
    > >> I neglected to spoof my header, and since Hurricane Isabel
    > >> I have gotten well over 10K such messages.
    > >>

    > >I get about 100 mails every day :(

    >
    > a spoofed from header is against my custom. things have calmed down a
    > little, so i only get around 150 per minute of these swen worms.


    I was thinking about doing lots of posts with forged sender address of
    . Maybe if they get 100 or so 150KB emails per minute
    they will figure out that there is a problem and what to do.

    My ISPs idea is that whenever I get an Swen32 email I should complain
    about it at their "abuse" email address, in which case they would then
    find out who sent it (fat chance since the address is forged anyway) and
    then probably do nothing about it because it's just a guy with an
    infected PC.

    What they could do quite easily: Find out which ones of _their own
    customers_ are infected. That is quite simple; they only let you access
    the Internet through their servers if you call from the right phone
    number. So if one of their customers connects and starts sending 150 KB
    emails, then some simple programming would direct that customer to a
    webpage telling them their computer is infected the next time they try
    to connect to any webpage. Install that software with every ISP, and
    within a week Swen is gone.

    You would think they would come up with something like that, because it
    is their money too. Actually, it is only their money, it costs me only
    time and nothing else.
     
    Christian Bau, Sep 26, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Roedy Green

    The Worm that Ate Microsoft

    Roedy Green, Aug 17, 2005, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    350
    Roland
    Aug 17, 2005
  2. ANTIGEN_EMAILWA1
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    296
    ANTIGEN_EMAILWA1
    Jan 28, 2004
  3. ANTIGEN_DATA
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    318
    ANTIGEN_DATA
    Jan 29, 2004
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    358
  5. ANTIGEN_ML-MAIL
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    166
    ANTIGEN_ML-MAIL
    Sep 9, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page