Slashdot Mirror
Domain: sendmail.net
Stories and comments across the archive that link to sendmail.net.
Comments · 19
-
Re:DomainKeys will not work. Crypto costs time and
Sendmail says DomainKeys adds 8-15% CPU load. Doesn't sound that expensive to me.
-
Re:what is ISC doing?
Sendmail Inc. http://www.sendmail.com/ is a commercial company that provides an open source Sender-ID (sid-milter) http://www.sendmail.net/ for Sendmail and provides Sendmail source code to the Sendmail Consortium http://www.sendmail.org/. The Sendmail Consortium maintains the open source version of Sendmail (from source code provided by Sendmail Inc.) and does not support Sendmail sid-milter. Guess which Sendmail entity (.com or
-
Re:Good for them, but not far enough.Yahoo!'s DomainKeys is superior in every respect.
Records already published by 70000+ domains, including some very important ones like aol.com.
A way to guess a default record for any domain not yet publishing, that works for most existing mail servers.
Code already under development and in beta testing for all major MTAs.
Algorithm already implemented in upcoming SpamAssassin filter, which is currently in release testing
It's an inferior attempt at authentication.
Yeah, yeah, yeah... it has crypto, so it must be strong.
Like the grandparent says, it's all a big waste of time. I'm going to delete those TXT records right now...
And replace it with a yahoo DomainKey? How are you going to do that? Oh, you're going to go download the reference implementation, compile this alpha-release source code, and run the "dknewkey" to get something like this:
testkey._domainkey IN TXT "k=rsa; p=MFwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADSwAwSAJBANazc9du4IFEWnS
r idEMAuv9UvCojT8hiTg1L646F6T4dRTsz7MB0WdnG2cF5J6HgA AlvpIB8HN1bh43FBb1MqkCAwEAAQ=="Then you're going to head over head and grab this while ignoring the advisory section:
THIS IS PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE, and should not be used in any critical production environments.
For someone highly concerned about what is and is not a waste of time (unlikely, posting to slashdot).... if you already did publish a SPF record, your best course of action is probably to just leave it there.
Certainly, Yahoo's DomainKeys is not yet to a degree of maturity to be actually used for much more than development and alpha testing.
In contrast, SPF is already protecting 70000+ domains and numerous sites are beginning to filter out forged messages pretending to be from those domains.
Very soon, SpamAssassin 3.x will be released (already on second release canidate), with SPF checking built in and turned on by default. Other anti-spam filters will follow.
From a practical point of view for the near future, choosing between installing a TXT record of the form "v=spf1..." or "k=rsa...", it's pretty clear which of these is useful today and which (unless you're a developer working on DomainKeys) is a waste of time.
-
I'll Take One More...> Are you claiming that there was a law somewhere that required people to fly commercial jets into buildings, thus people slowly got the impression that it was OK?
Reducto ad Absurdum. I'm not even going to grace this with an answer.
> No it isn't [much harder for evildoers to influence those who are well educated]
Lawyers regularly dismiss jurors during Voire Dire for no other reason than the fact that they are college graduates. The reason given my by my lawyer friends is that the higher the level of education, the less likely the juror is to be swayed by emotional testimony. Enough said.
> Which experts agree? You are just making wild accusations without any shred of evidence.
Well, the CIA, for one. If you need direct quotes, respond to this and I'll give you links to keep you busy for a few hours reading.
> Are you claiming that the founding fathers were terrorists? How many innocent lives did they take en route to establishing America?
Not only am I claiming it, the British colonial government claimed it as well. When the Sons of Liberty decided to throw the Boston Tea Party, they dressed as Indians, boarded the British merchantmen and overpowered the crews, and dumped the tea into the harbor. Does a sailor whose only crime is being a night crewman on a British ship qualify as "innocent"? How about the Tory-sympathetic farmer whose farms were burned by Washington's troops so the Brits wouldn't have anything to eat? Lastly, you should consider that blowing up military ships and burning a British fort to the ground in the middle of the night qualify as terrorist acts, even though civilians weren't involved. If it isn't, how do you describe the attack on the U.S.S. Cole?
> You are holding up farmers as examples of savvy businessmen?
Most farmers are very savvy businessmen, because the ones who aren't can't make a living farming. Don't be a bigot.
> If it weren't for government subsidies there would be no farmers.
> Why do they need government subsidies? Because the food they grow
> is in abundance.
This is nuts. And you claim to have a degree in economics? The government subsidies are in place to encourage large farms not to overproduce so that smaller farms can survive. To say that removing the subsidies would eliminate farmers is lunacy. It would eliminate small farms, as large farms, which can take advantage of economies of scale in shipping and storage, push prices down to the point where smaller farms are no longer profitable. This is precisely what happened in the crude oil industry, where such economic controls were absent.
> The only profit is monetary.
Again, you got a degree in economics? Two words: market share. There's more than money involved, even in capitalism. Many businesses give up profits every day for things like market share, public opinion and other such things. In the wake of the attacks, and the outpouring of assistance from corporations, I'm surprised you still can't see past the balance sheet.
> Sure you do buddy, I bet. You are just dripping with degrees aren't you?
MS Econs. from Rutgers University, 1991, and AssSci in Physics, same institution and year. And by the way, up yours for the implication.
> > Apache is a free web server, but it's running more than two thirds of all web sites.
> No it isn't. Just because Slashdot claims its so doesn't make it reality.
> I don't understand why people don't question the mainstream media outlets
> more often.
OK, how about Netcraft? Or Sendmail (old link, but you seem to imply that free software never has or had good market penetration)? Or Forbes? Apache has been the mainstream web server since 1991, and has just recently lost some (but not much) of its market to IIS. To quote, I don't understand why people don't question the mainstream media outlets more often.
> Neither does anyone else. They don't contain enough functionality to be of use for any actual work.
I refer to Apache for a web server and Sendmail as a mail transfer agent, and I'll let your own statment bury you.
> Thats why the stuff is distributed with the disclaimer that "This software is provided without any warranty of any kind, not even an assurance of fitness for use" or some other such fancy way of saying that it doesn't really work all that well.
When was the last time you read the EULA for Windows? This exact phrase comes from the Windows 2000 EULA. See if it sounds familiar.THE LIMITED WARRANTY THAT APPEARS ABOVE IS THE ONLY EXPRESS WARRANTY MADE TO YOU AND IS PROVIDED IN LIEU OF ANY OTHER EXPRESS WARRANTIES (IF ANY) CREATED BY ANY DOCUMENTATION OR PACKAGING. EXCEPT FOR THE LIMITED WARRANTY AND TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, MICROSOFT AND ITS SUPPLIERS PROVIDE THE SOFTWARE AND SUPPORT SERVICES (IF ANY) AS IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS, AND HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL OTHER WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS, EITHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY (IF ANY) IMPLIED WARRANTIES, DUTIES OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OF ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OR RESPONSES, OF RESULTS, OF WORKMANLIKE EFFORT, OF LACK OF VIRUSES AND OF LACK OF NEGLIGENCE, ALL WITH REGARD TO THE SOFTWARE, AND THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT SERVICES. ALSO, THERE IS NO WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF TITLE, QUIET ENJOYMENT, QUIET POSSESSION, CORRESPONDENCE TO DESCRIPTION OR NON-INFRINGEMENT WITH REGARD TO THE SOFTWARE.
Telling, no? Oh, and the limited warranty mentioned is that they'll return your money or send you a new copy if the medium is damaged (scratched CD or damaged diskettes).
You may want to try reading up on the whole open-source movement. For that matter, you might want to review everything you said here for accuracy.
Virg -
Dust off those old usenet servers.
With some sort of ssh-type login subscription control and encrypted pipes, usenet servers could very well serve for distributing files on a veeeery wide basis. It's been a while since I've touched INN or CNEWS, so I don't know if that sort of thing has been worked into the old favorite protocols, but some like Sendmail are starting to move towards providing for closed encrypted networks. Of course, this could be used for both good and bad, so it's probably going to cause a ruckus and some people dopey enough to let someone not deeply in their web of trust access to whatever information (files? music? movies? pics?) is stored there are likely to make it short-lived.
-
"San Francisco inventor" unmasked
Last time I looked, the "San Francisco inventor, Sunil Paul" was also chairman and co-founder of Brightmail, which has been executing on patent 6,052,709 for quite some time. Brightmail also hosted Spam Summit 2000 in Washington, DC last May.
-
Re:For a bunch of geeks...
Sendmail 8.10 supports smtp auth; click here for details.
Incidently, just because you can fake the headers, doesn't mean that you should, or that we're not allowed to complain and, if allowed to do so by law, prosecute you if you do. This is a form of fraud that we're talking about here; claiming to be someone that you're not, or to represent someone/something that you do not. That's illegal in most other media, so why should email be any different?
Cheers,
Tim -
Re:It *is* insightful... both ways...
Once I do get things working, I almost always find that it was worth the effort to "learn" my way through the process. But sometimes I'd rather be out playing pool and drinking beer with friends. I enjoy tinkering and fiddling with things, but sometimes I just want the thing to WORK, without having to worry about which "bleeding-edge" library I've got to download and compile..
Agreed. Not only do I sometimes want to drink beer more than fiddle with the software, at times I'd actually like to *use* the software...
This article has an excellent discussion of the need for attention to the end user's needs in OS development. It focuses on interface issues, but has a good analysis of the problems of perspective.
-
whats new in sendmail. link for the lazy
-
Sendmail.netFor lots of really good information on Sendmail 8.10 checkout Sendmail.net
They have a series of articles such as Spam control in 8.10, Performance and usability in 8.10 and many more.
Noel
-
Sendmail.netFor lots of really good information on Sendmail 8.10 checkout Sendmail.net
They have a series of articles such as Spam control in 8.10, Performance and usability in 8.10 and many more.
Noel
-
Sendmail.netFor lots of really good information on Sendmail 8.10 checkout Sendmail.net
They have a series of articles such as Spam control in 8.10, Performance and usability in 8.10 and many more.
Noel
-
Article on Helix Code and GNOME
If you want to read more about this, there's a story running concurrently on Wide Open News and sendmail.net that went live at 4:15 this morning. The gist of the story (from the sendmail.net front door): "The new GNOME binaries Helix Code rolled out today are the red carpet that its first application product, an HTML-capable email client called Evolution, will step onto in a few weeks. If users like what they see, it could be Helix Code that puts Linux on the consumer desktop. Paul Boutin spoke with Miguel de Icaza and Nat Friedman about it." Quotable quote (from Nat): "We plan to wipe Microsoft Outlook off the desktop."
-
Article on Helix Code and GNOME
If you want to read more about this, there's a story running concurrently on Wide Open News and sendmail.net that went live at 4:15 this morning. The gist of the story (from the sendmail.net front door): "The new GNOME binaries Helix Code rolled out today are the red carpet that its first application product, an HTML-capable email client called Evolution, will step onto in a few weeks. If users like what they see, it could be Helix Code that puts Linux on the consumer desktop. Paul Boutin spoke with Miguel de Icaza and Nat Friedman about it." Quotable quote (from Nat): "We plan to wipe Microsoft Outlook off the desktop."
-
Hmm... homepage
-
recent Tiemann interview
Apologies for the self-promo, but we published a fairly long interview with Michael Tiemann not too long ago. I think he's a good guy for the job.
-
Re: MX recordsI just read more info about this; this sounds like it provides an escape hatch when the load goes sky high.
This is a quote from an Eric Allman interview on sendmail.net:Are there features in sendmail that people should be aware of but aren't?
Oh, there are probably dozens of them. One that comes to mind, a very simple one, is the fallback MX option, which lets you redirect mail that has failed the first time to another location. It essentially acts as a lowest possible priority MX record for all hosts. For example, if you've got a mail system that's got a lot of traffic going through it, you have another machine that you dedicate to the slow mail, the stuff that didn't go through the first time, where presumably you're less concerned about how quickly it goes because the other end's being slow. So you set your initial connection timeout to something low - five seconds, ten seconds, whatever's right for your site - and you set the fallback MX on your main site to this fallback host. That way the mail that's going to go through quickly just goes fsssssssst right through your main server, while the stuff that's going to be slow (because the other end is either slow to connect or down) goes off to this other machine and doesn't clog up the main machine. It turns out to be just an amazing win. And these days the price of a PC box running FreeBSD or Linux is close enough to zero that it might as well be zero, so it's not really a problem to do it.
-
Re: MX recordsI just read more info about this; this sounds like it provides an escape hatch when the load goes sky high.
This is a quote from an Eric Allman interview on sendmail.net:Are there features in sendmail that people should be aware of but aren't?
Oh, there are probably dozens of them. One that comes to mind, a very simple one, is the fallback MX option, which lets you redirect mail that has failed the first time to another location. It essentially acts as a lowest possible priority MX record for all hosts. For example, if you've got a mail system that's got a lot of traffic going through it, you have another machine that you dedicate to the slow mail, the stuff that didn't go through the first time, where presumably you're less concerned about how quickly it goes because the other end's being slow. So you set your initial connection timeout to something low - five seconds, ten seconds, whatever's right for your site - and you set the fallback MX on your main site to this fallback host. That way the mail that's going to go through quickly just goes fsssssssst right through your main server, while the stuff that's going to be slow (because the other end is either slow to connect or down) goes off to this other machine and doesn't clog up the main machine. It turns out to be just an amazing win. And these days the price of a PC box running FreeBSD or Linux is close enough to zero that it might as well be zero, so it's not really a problem to do it.
-
Even newer report on sendmail.net
Hi guys,
Thanks for the link. We've posted a second update from the conference's second day this afternoon on sendmail.net.