Allow multiple filename extensions?

[Antony Stone]

On Friday 11 July 2003 3:21 pm, Howard Robinson wrote:

> On 11 Jul 03, at 9:09, mikea wrote:
> Hello
> I block all > single extensions and exe etc.
> If users can't use sensible names that's their problem.

I disagree with this.

I think that multiple extensions on filenames are perfectly sensible (eg
Forecast.aug.xls, or kernel.tar.bz2) and should not be discouraged.   It is
only the CP/M - Dos - Windows mentality that places such emphasis on the last
three letters and a dot at the end of a filename which causes any confusion -
Unix people have been using multiple extensions for years with no problems.

> A little
> education can help and those that don't/won't understand are the
> very ones that may run something nasty.

Surely they can only run something nasty if the *final* extension is one of
exe, com, bat, pif, scr etc - and those are the ones which you (hopefully)
block anyway using the other rules?

> It would be better is if the hide known extensions in windows was
> removed so that the true filename was always shown.

I agree :))   However, let's stick to a reasonable objective please :)

Regards,

Antony.

--

If you think you see a Heffalump in a trap,
make sure it isn't really a Bear with an empty honey jar stuck on his head.