Outlook by default blocks .url attachments and not .htm – why?
Any dangerous URL that could be in .url file, could also easily be in a .htm file and could be launched using javascript automatically. I see the same risk with both attachments, but Microsoft treats it differently. Am I missing something here? How is a .htm file safer than .url?
What else could be in .url file that a hacker could not put in .htm file?
.urlfiles which would cause contained data to be interpreted without user interaction. – Oliver Salzburg Feb 28 at 12:59