Slashdot Mirror
MSN Forces Outlook POP
Phoenix-D writes: "Qwest.net, my Phoenix-area DSL provider and ISP, recently decided to hand over their ISP buisness to MSN. No huge deal, right? Well, check out this blurb: 'Due to the Microsoft anti-spam initiative, customers are restricted to use their mail services. Therefore, POP3 service is only available when using MSN Explorer, Microsoft Outlook, or Microsoft Outlook Express.'" Awesome. Microsoft's Anti-Spam initiative forces POP users to use the primary sender of mail worms.
They could force everyone to use a MAPI client.
How exactly is this enforced? I'm sure there has got to be someway to get around it, if they allow Outlook to use it, then there has to be some way to fool the system into thinking whatever you are using is outlook... isn't there?
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
Awesome. Microsoft's Anti-Spam initiative forces POP users to use the primary sender of mail worms.
Good... maybe that will force people to apply their damn patches so I quit getting their documents in my mailbox.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
How is this even possible? POP3 is an open standard, and most every client speaks that protocol. To restrict it to one set of clients seems like a futile measure, as clients will just start coming with options to spoof their client ID, just like Opera and iCab can for http.
1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 -- Mathematics is the Language of Nature.
it says that you have to use POP3. Why wouldn't that include any client that supports POP3? There is nothing in a POP3 transmission that is hidden. If they were really forcing you to use it (which I highly doubt) then you could trick the server into thinking that you are coming from an Outlook client.
Personally I would complain to your ISP about the lack of service for non-MS clients (if this is truly the case).
This is like Exxon saying if you want to use their gas you have to have an Exxon car. Someone please explain to me again why MS's business practices aren't anti-competitive? I won't even get into how oxymoronic it is to push outlook and hotmail as ways to combat spam, worms, etc..
Is this going to be MS's new way of stopping Linux from gaining ground? Make a DSL/Cable deal with a provider and force subscribers to use your tools which just so happen to be on your platform exclusively.....Anti-trust violations ad infinitum
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
All right, this is gonna sound bad. But let's be real here: you can dump always dump your ISP is you disagree with heinous policies. Yes, I know that in some areas there aren't many providers of decent bandwidth (especially recently with DSL companies going buh-bye left and right), but customers have to stand up for their rights on this sort of thing. Unfortunately, given our recent state of affairs in government, the only *effective* way of doing so is making your dollars do the talking.
Of course, there's always other options too. You could always skip the ISP part and just do your email via web hosting service (no, I'm not self-serving here, it's just true). Especially for folks who run a business, this is a good option.
What other ways are there of combating this kind of B.S.? I suspect the good folks over at Netscape and other net software providers aren't going to be too terribly thrilled with this... do any of these companies have workarounds?
From the article :
:)
Currently, the plan is to transition those customers who:
Have Qwest.net Internet Access using an analog dial-up line, Qwest DSL 256, Qwest DSL Select, or Qwest DSL Deluxe connection and,
Use the Windows operating system.
MAC Customers: MSN is working on a MAC solution for your Internet access needs. Until that time, there will not be any changes to your Qwest.net Internet Access service.
No mention of Linux, but I'd assume they'll treat non-Windows the same (until they have a Mac-only fix, of course).
Hmmm - taking a second look at the capitalization on "MAC", it looks like they don't have a "solution" for anyone using a network card
Last post!
From the faq on MSN-QWEST (the most hillarious thing i have ever read):
"Q: Why should I transition my service to MSN®?
A: There are many reasons why you should transition your service:
With more than 230 million visitors per month, MSN is available in 33 markets and in 17 languages.
(Source: Jupiter MediaMetrixTM Digital Media Report, April 01 for US, UK, France, Germany, Canada, Australia, Japan, Spain, Brazil, Italy, Switzerland. Data are an aggregation of above listed countries.)
When you upgrade your service, special promotions are available to you.
Quality, reliability and speed.
Technical support, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, at no charge!
Continue to enjoy POP3 e-mail service, with an option to switch to the world's largest Web-based e-mail service, MSN Hotmail®, via MSN Internet Explorer and get up to nine e-mail screen names for you and the rest of your family. (Due to the Microsoft anti-spam initiative, customers are restricted to use their mail services. Therefore, POP3 service is only available when using MSN Explorer, Microsoft Outlook, or Microsoft Outlook Express.)
Instant messaging from MSN Messenger Service, the fast growing instant messaging service.
You get more space for your personal Web site from 5 MB to 30 MB.
Easy access to great resources from MSN that help make your life better.
Catch up on the latest news from MSNBC
Listen to your favorite music
Play games
Send instant messages
Create an online photo album for your family
Personalize your home page with weather, sports, news or local events
Shop from the convenience of your home
Invest your money wisely
Search for information
Send online greeting cards
Plan your vacation
Take care of your family's health (This one is amazing)
And, so much more
Microsoft email spam free? I think not!
I opened a hotmail account last week so I could set up an instant messenger account. I made sure that I had unchecked *all* the advertising, pass on your e-mail, useful partners checkboxes. I have *never* used the account and have *never* published the address yet within 24 hours I had a dozen XXX, $$$ emails in the inbox.
--
Reverse outsourcing: it's the future
Well, it loaded now, but it's slow.
Any way, how can the tell what POP3 you're using? And why would POP3 stop spam? Wouldn't SMTP be where the action is? (I'm assuming that's what they mean). Are they looking at headers (easily emulated by spamware, ineffective) or some other signature? And I don't see how this will stop spam, anything like that is easily emulated. More and more stupidity.
funny munging
I can't imagine a better example of anti-competitive practices. MS is going to force people who never selected them as an ISP to use MS software in a manner that does not at all aid "anti-spam initiatives" and, as the post pointed out, will almost certainly make related problems even worse. How on earth does *anything* related to what client is used to access a POP3 server effect spam??? SMTP would at least seem in the ballpark, but POP?
Send them a snail-mail to MSN stating that you are an employee of a firm that makes a commercial e-mail client that competes with Outlook. Ask MSN to provide to you, in writing, a statement about the use of non-Microsoft e-mail clients on MSN. Make sure to suggest that this be handled by their lawyers.
If you want to really get their sphincters to pucker, send a copy to the Justice Department.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but POP is a way to *retrieve* email. How does the client that you're using to *retrieve* your mail matter when it comes to spam? Granted, OE has some mail filters that can be used, but so do other clients (procmail anyone?).
I could see this being legit if, somehow, it prevented the SENDING of spam...but it seems like, if anything, it could only possibly prevent your receiving it...that's like telling someone...well, i don't know what that's like telling someone, because it just seems ridiculous...
Juiced? Or Not?
This is probably - and I do stress probably - one of those "we only support outlook and outlook express" sort of things. I mean technically AT&T@Home only allows Windows9x and Mac machines to use their network, but that sure hasn't stopped me. This way the tech support people only have to know (or deal with) two fairly similar programs.
At least one hopes thats it.
Ad in classifieds: Pandora's Box (no box) $5
When you sign up for a passport id with a hotmail account they wouldn't sell that address to everyone under the sun.
I signed up for hotmail before MS ever took it over. I never used the email address in any form online, never even had any mail to it. I basically just had it because. After MS took over it litterally filled the account with junk mail.
telnet popserver.msn.com 110
user user
pass password
list
Replace popserver.msn.com with the actual pop3 server. I have no clue what it actually is.
I'm going to go back in my box and will think within the limits of my box: MS Sucks Linux Good I read too much Slashdot.
They don't allow third party smtp server either. This has caused us aa bit of a hassle as we have a lot of faculty that want to use our mail server to send mail (with authentication of course) but MSN blocks all connections to a third party smtp server and if you don't use a @msn.com type address as the From it doesn't allow it either.
--"Karma is justice without the satisfaction"
Outlook uses Secure Password Authentication (SPA). Some weird protocol that only microsoft knows. No other programs that I am aware of support it.
I setup outlook express for a friend of mine who uses MSN. It seems microsoft's way of authenticating users is some sort of "secure" authentication. It's a feature called "SPA" or secure password authentication. My guess is that they encrypt the account name and password in a similar way to NT login authentication so the actual name and password never go across the wire.
-ted
Browsing through my spam filter, I see a lot of message from Hotmail. Microsoft contends, for whatever reason, that spam originates from everyone else. How long until users realizes that the amount of spam INCREASES once they enforce this stupid policy? How long until they realize that Microsoft's software is responsible for worms and this policy actually slows down their connection? This is absolutely rediculous.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
So, what do they do for customers who aren't using an OS that Outlook is available for?
Not only are they forcing you to use Outlook, they're forcing you to use Windows. (I believe it's available for Mac too, yeah...).
MadCow.
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
That sentence could be read
"When using Outlook express, Outlook or MSN explorer you will only be able to use pop3"
I think they need to clarify that (and I have a feeling they will if I know slashdotians).
--"Karma is justice without the satisfaction"
I believe they are talking about accessing your HOTMAIL mail account via POP3. As far as I know, as long as this service has been available, you have had to use a MS mail client, as they actually send you ads in a pane at the bottom of Outlook/OE.
I believe there is also a workaround to block the ads, but I can't remember where I saw it.
I've been doing it for years, to have an independant und uninterrupted news and email service when I switch ISP.
It is hard to find a good ISP that offers a decent newsfeed these days, and email service in general is also deteriorating. IMO it is better to subscribe to mail and news at a specialized provider, and use the ISP only for access.
you mean like aol? thats fine, keep em outta myt hair...keep the viruses in msn/net and off my machine!
________________________________________________
Reading stories like this makes me happy to have good DSL service here in Portland, Oregon: Qwest wiring and Hevanet.com as ISP. Hevanet also has excellent tech support.
(Contact me for help programming your Cisco 675.)
Bush's education improvements were
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The more star systems will slip through your fingers...
- some girl with sticky buns on the sides of her head, Star Wars
This has been rumored for some time. One can escape assimilation by paying an extra $10/month and going to OfficeWorks, although rumor ALSO has it that even OfficeWorks won't be safe from the Evil Empire.
Someone mentioned getting around this. The problem is the DMCA. As I understand it, it's now illegal to do that kind of reverse engineering, i.e. the type that allowed *nix users to connect to SMB via Samba. So basically, through emrbrace and extend, MS can technically and legally exclude non-conformists.
To switch ISPs requires a 3-week downtime. This is done to eliminate the "slamming" phenonemon that plagued Long Distace carriers. I being one of the "renegades" running an alternative OS, have been looking into alternatives.
The problem is that I work from home (so I have between 3-5 machines networked into a DSL line) and it would create no small problem if I were to have to connect via modem for 3 weeks. Although given the alternative, I may be purchasing a modem...
Computer Science is Applied Philosophy
In theory any e-mail client that supports SPA could be used. Right now that would be MSN Explorer, Outlook Express, and Outlook.
-- Argel
Just felt compelled to point out web-based email also. ISP givin' you a hard time? Screw 'em as follows, and make sure to send an email to their PR department letting them know what you think of their support of this sort of idiotic policy.
SquirrelMail.
There it be. Have fun!
This is clearly NOT a violations of anybodys rights.. This ISP is private business, and they are out-sourcing thier email hosting to another private business. And THEY have the right to impose ANY DAMN RULES THEY WANT!!.
Just is just as much of a rights violation as:
- Not allowing broadband users to host home servers
- Not imposing limits on the amount of bandwidth you can use
- Not supporting all OS's
- Blocking ports
It's a private business, and it's thier damn business how you use THIER network, THEIR servers, and THEIR routers.
And, it's YOUR damn right to go elsewhere.
Now excuse me. I have to go sue McDonalds becuase they insist on serving me Coke, and it's my right to want and get Pepsi.
--knick
Further down this post I explained that. I think SPA uses an authentication mechanism similar to NT authentication. Basically it's a token exchange process to encrypt the name and password so the plain text name and password never go across the wire.
-ted
From the website:
Q: What does the MSN® and Qwest® alliance mean to me?
A: Under the agreement, MSN will become the preferred Internet Service Provider (ISP) for some Qwest.net Consumer Internet Access customers. Qwest and Microsoft® are working together to provide consumers with best-of-breed MSN content and services via Qwest's Internet infrastructure. Customers will benefit from this joint offering in many ways including... (emphasis added)
Ummm...according to the Consumer Reports Sept. 2001 issue, MSN was rated as the worst Internet provider.
Nice to see that Microsoft not only squeezes the consumer, limits choice, but also engages in bald-faced lying!!
Is anyone out there actually using this service and can they tell how the network is attempting to enforce this? Are they simply saying if you want them to provide you with an email service you must use one of their clients for the account? Or are they saying if you want to use email you must use one of their accounts (i.e. you can't use any other pop/smtp/imap email provider to collect or receive mail). Are they blocking ports? Finally if this is an anti-spam measure, why are they talking about POP? POP is for collecting mail not sending it! If they were talking about SMTP then it would make sense. Are they simply looking for a way to ensure they are filtering all email?
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
The solution is simple enough, get another ISP. I don't even use the POP3 mail accounts my ISP provides. I use netscape webmail, and can check my e-mail everywhere. I used to use hotmail, until MSFT bought it, but I am sure I am one of the millions of people microsoft says are potential Passport members...... (Yeah Right!)
I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
You know, my qwest DSL went down last night(longer than normal), and with this whole MSN thing, I'm really tempted to switch to sihope now, not just because a friend of mine is egging me to switch.
Not leveraging a monopoly, but not moral either.
If I was a Qwest customer using Linux, I would be pissed (I am not a Qwest customer...).
Their reasoning seems to be that network snoopers could overhear plain-text passwords coming into the pop server and use that to send email through the SMTP servers. Why not just use Qmail with an SSL X509 cert? Would provide better protection in general...
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
He can't put a new email client to the market, if the leading ISP's doesn't allow their users to use new clients. If he can't market it, he will not be able to fund the development. If he can't fund the development, inovation will die.
If you run the mail server (POP, SMTP or IMAP, etc), or you know the person who does run the mail server. Tell them to put the services on an additional port that MSN won't be blocking.
If your using an ISP for your mail services. Ask them to put the mail server on an additional port. www.mailbank.com does this.
If MSN is blocking low number ports, use high numbered ports.
Now, if this weren't Microsoft, who brought us everything that is good, I'd say the whole thing is just an outright lie.
The solution is very very simple. When you sign up for QWest DSL, tell 'em you want to use a different ISP. You don't *have* to use MSN. Already have MSN? Call QWest and ask 'em to change your ISP. It's just that simple. All QWest provides is a high speed route to the ISP of your choice.
*Condense fact from the vapor of nuance*
Call 1-800-244-1111
I called, and the rep told me you have to be using Microsoft's OS if you want to subscribe to their new MSN service. You can still have a regular Qwest account.
So what's all the hooplah about?
MSN's anti-spam filters force you to use their SMTP servers and blocks any outbound port 25 traffic. This does not 'stop spam' but it forces spammers to use MSN's mail servers and not the anonymous open relays that they prefer. Since spammers need to be as anonymous as possible, they have (for the most part) left MSN's dial-ups.
No replies made to AC posts. Please log in.
http://www.ridiculopathy.com/news_detail.php?disp
You're right, of course, since there is no real infringement on anyones rights here. I used to be a Qwest customer, but as soon as I heard they signed a deal with MSN, I foresaw things like this taking place and I found a local ISP and I'm paying less than I did with Qwest. Local ISP's aren't hard to find and they're often cheaper than Qwest. If you don't like what a company is doing, find someone else, that's what an open market is all about. Corporate execs don't read slashdot, they read their bottom line and if they find enough people switching and their margins start slipping, they'll do something about their policies. I didn't like what Qwest was doing, so I stopped giving them my money (well, I still have to give them the money for the DSL line, but there's nothing I can do about that).
:).
If anyone lives in the denver/boulder area, I would suggest netrack.net, they have reasonable rates and they don't care if you resell the bandwidth, so I've set up a wireless network in my area and I'm charging other people to use it, works like a charm
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
MS wants access to all of the email that you receive, so that it can read... er, filter out all of the anti-MS propog... er, spam before you even get to... er, have to look at it.
Seems like having an SSH tunnel to your favorite mail server would be ideal. At least my main mail server I can SSH to, and others I could forward there.
And of course if you are tunneling to your mail server directly, pop3 being in plaintext isn't such a problem. If it'd work with other authentication means, I don't know. However, it seems to me like a good alternative.
As both someone who's worked at an ISP, and who has worked at a University, what they're doing by disallowing outbound port 25 connections is a GOOD thing, as it keeps spammers from using a throwaway account to originate and inject to open relays.
Odds are, it's not based on the from address, but based on the originating IP address. [as to just allow 'from: *@msn.com' is setting themselves up as a third party relay for messages with forged headers.] It may also not be MSN, but it may be UUNet, who I believe MSN rents POPs from.
Now, for the solution -- tell the faculty to follow the instructions from their ISP for their home machines, not the instructions from the university, which is for local machines. If they have to have a from address with MSN in it to use the SMTP servers, just tag on a reply-to address.
The only whining that might take a little bit of a work arround is for those folks who use a laptop from both home and from work. You need to use an ISP that can push DNS server information to you in the PPP negotiation, or a broadband connection with DNS defined by the DHCP server, so that they're getting dynamic DNS at home, and using DHCP sending DNS at work, so they have dynamic DNS there. Then, they need to put in a non-FQDN for the SMTP server.
For example, you have someone at isp.net, and work for lame.edu. The isp has a host named smtp.isp.net which they can deliver their mail to, and you have a machine named smtp.lame.edu which the faculty [why do the faculty always complain the most?] can use when they're on campus.
When off campus, they're using the dns servers at isp.net, and so, when sending to 'smtp', it looks up 'smtp.isp.net'. When on campus, they're using the dns servers at lame.edu, and so, 'smtp' would be 'smtp.lame.edu'.
If you have enough users on their system, you can normally get issues pushed through to someone more signficant at the ISP, so that you can find some working solution before having the users try it. [Our university's been in talks with AOL for a week or two, as it seems that when we set up a Trend virus firewall, we opened ourselves up for third party relaying, and AOL started sporaticly dropping our e-mail when their spam traps were triggered]
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Simple Solution:
For the SMTP server, use:
"macsmtp.email.msn.com"
and your normal user/pass .
They don't have it working right for Mac clients; tada.
I've been using this for about 2 months now on my Windows and Linux machines and it works great.
Personally, I am more concerned with why I can't send mail to anyone using AOL/Walmarts ISP: wmconnect.com .
Cute acronym
(Or should that be: Oxymoron)
-Eldurbarn
I wonder how long until they have their own, seperate internet, just for msn... okay..
If only... Gawd... to never have to deal with an AOL'er again. The internet would revert to the kind of place it was back when the big online service providers were 'private communities' rather than fungi and parasites on the main body of the internet. No, I don't think I'm that lucky in real life.
Actually, I can see it happening. Between them, AOL-TW and MS will carve up the internet into two huge, vast pieces, and anyone who really cares about having a 'real' internet will start to use a 'piggyback' service ala freenet, or something inbetween freenet and ip6. This is feasible now that there are so many cable modems and DLS connections.
Who are we kidding, though? The big ISP-Software-As-a-Service-Provider will simply block any traffic that doesn't directly connect to their online applications.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Except that these aren't faithful MS customers. These are customers they bought from Qwest.net.
Articles like this make me glad I was unable to get Qwest DSL and went with TW RoadRunner instead... my biggest fear now is that RR will somehow be merged with AOL down the road.
I do not have a signature
I'm not.
They do mention Mac's in the FAQ, but no other OS's (there are other OS's?). What choices are provided in the form? Could you prevent the change from occuring if you choose something like Linux?
This doesn't makes sense from Qwest's biz perspective.
They're probably being paid an ungodly amount of money by MS to push this policy. However, they won't end up saving on bandwidth in this, especially if customers switch to MSN web-based mail (pulling down bloated HTML pages instead of just text messages).
Plus, here's another way of looking at it: Does Qwest stand any risk of getting burned by folks choosing MSN for an ISP over their service? Yes, there are differences in speed involved, but this initiative does stand to give MSN a LOT of extra market exposure. Qwest may want to consider whether they're taking aim squarely at their left foot in this regard.
I reported this back in June.
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
It's a little slow, but it works like a charm. Who gives a damn about pop3?
The middle mind speaks!
MSN is already breaking things by insisting on a @msn.com From line. Everyone else is just trying to work around it.
h .t xt
Yes, you should always just use your "local" SMTP gateway, but when the people running it are being draconian morons, you don't have many choices... and no, having official correspondence go out under @msn.com isn't an option.
If MSN was serious about this, they'd just use several of the possible authentication methods that exist for SMTP service (IP range, SMTP-after-POP, SASL, ). It sounds like they've picked one, and only one, instead of implementing several and allowing mail to go if any of the above are met.
Some SMTP auth links:
http://www.thecabal.org/~devin/postfix/smtp-aut
http://www.qmail.org/top.html (look for "authenticate")
http://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/auth.html
What we need is an electronic version of the Amnesty International letter writing tables. People could log in, get presented with a list of the most eggregious offenses against free and open software, and have the links to send polite emails to those companies asking them to change their practices. Maybe this type of approach would have kept Congress from passing DMCA...
More and more providers seem to like being a nanny. Port blockades, proxies, on-server mailviruscheckers, etc. wouldn't be so annoying if providers offered an easy and reliable way to turn these features off. There is a chance to circumvent the restrictions though: Make your traffic opaque, encrypt it with IPSec. After that, all that is left of your connections are target IP addresses and seemingly random data. No more ports and no more chances to interfere with your data through proxies. The provider can only allow all your connections or none.
Yeah, well this good sysadmin sees all of the work that must go into securing Outlook on each and every box and I can't help but think that the obvious solution is to use a different email client.
Sure, Outlook probably can be secured, but what's the point. It's much simpler to use an email client that wasn't specifically designed as a virus breeding ground. There are plenty of perfectly acceptable email clients that have a much better security history than Outlook.
In following with your gun analogy Outlook is a Saturday night special holdout pistol that is nearly as likely to blow your hand off as to work correctly. It's cheap, it's got some neat features, but it's dangerous. Using some other email client accomplishes the same thing without the the added risk and work of securing Outlook.
I've been a Qwest.net user for a long time. I'm finally moving my accounts elsewhere because I refuse to use MSN.
This requirement is probably derived from the fact that the Qwest.net infrastructure is POP3 only. Thus, since you're going to be using MSN via the Qwest.net infrastructure, you're stuck with POP3 until Qwest upgrades.
MSN has no clue if you're sending spam through a third party relay, or if you're connecting to a legitimate authenticating mail relay, or if you're handing your own SMTP, and connecting to the proper MX.
MSN allowing outbound port 25 connections from a dialup customer is a step backwards for spam prevention. As someone who's being affected en mass by their changing policies, your university should contact them, and inform them that they either need to make provisions for your case, or that your group will have to make sure that your users take their business elsewhere, and find an ISP that you can work with.
If the faculty members were using their university e-mail addresses, and not their MSN one, they will have no issue in moving to a new ISP, save for the initial time in re-configuration. If they were using their local MSN e-mail address, and they're not willing to give it up, then they have to weigh the costs & benefits in switching. The only ones who are really screwed in this situation are not those that are concerned with third party relay, but wished to use some other non-MS client to read their mail from.
Realisticly, you should be using authenticated SMTP to see if there's some prick in the dorms starting up his own little spamming business. You should not expect outside ISPs however, to allow your users to connect to the server from a dialup connection. [Hell, we don't even allow allow relaying for connections from off-campus, although, that was a recent change [this morning] due to the lack of being able to authenticate with the trend micro virus scanner in front of the SIMS mail cloud, and we're just waiting to see how many users start complaining as they didn't get the messages regarding the policy changes]
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
If you have to use MSN as an ISP, use something else as your mail server.
If you must have a hotmail account (for access to IM or whatever), just put in two filters: (1) If subject contains Free Pizza, send to Trash, and (2)If subject does not contain Free Pizza, send to Trash. This will keep those annoying mail notifications from popping up on your IM.
While I agree that this isn't exactly a rights issue, I complete disagree that MSN or MS can do whatever they want. The FOF has survived appeal and it is now a brave new world for MS. Every move they make is fair game for legal scurtiny. You can cry about the supposed free market all you want but that ain't the real world and in this case I'd rather nip this in the bud before MSN gets a stranglehold share in the marketplace.
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
Maybe they will start an investigation into Quest.net?
Cool.
I will look more into this.
I still am looking into POP3 over SSL because it protects the content of all email as well, though.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
"I wonder how long until they have their own, seperate internet".
Well if things keep going at the rate they are, they very well might get something very similar:
1) can't access pop3 account without MS Outlook
2) can't view certain pages without MS IE
3) can't view certain media content without MS media player
4) can't chat with people unless you use MSN Messenger
Now we have a choice in all of the above, not to use them, and use something else. But if MS continues to gain marketshare, and put a stranglehold on their closed technologies - we could very well see a fair portion of the Internet locking out non MS users.
(Serious answer: They're trying to reduce outgoing spam, not incoming spam, in order to cut down on the number of abuse complaints they have to deal with. It's got nothing to do with protecting their users from inbound spam, and everything to do with cutting the costs of running the MSN portion of the ISP business and further-entrenching the Microsoft monopoly.)
So, by definition, they are commiting potential anti-trust violations by requiring Microsoft only applications to allow people to get their e-mail.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
That's definitely bogus. Even if they own the DSL lines, they're obligated to provide any ISP access to the DSL drop at your house. ILEC or CLEC, it doesn't matter. All that MS can do is reconnect you or be prepared to be told that they can't do business in your state.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
As part of our ongoing effort to reduce junk emails to our loyal customers, the Microsoft abuse management team has created a new "real-time black hole" domain block list. This list is used to check all mail routed through our servers (increased in volume thanks to our new deal with Qwest) for known spammer domain names.
You may be interested to note that leading this list are the following notorious domains. These sites should be avoided for the protection of our revenue stream... errr... customers:
Additionally, our upcoming Microsoft World Browser will include protection against websites hosted at these domains. Thank you for your cooperation as we work to improve your user experience on the web.
Sincerely,
Microsoft Support
Neither one really requires technical knowledge to use, both are cheap (avoid the free mail forwarding services - if they're not making money, they're not going to be "permanent"), and they're generally simple to set up particularly if all you need is to have mail forwarded to your current ISP. ISP gets bought out? New terms are something you don't like? Switch ISPs. Once you're set up with your own address, the ISP just becomes a bandwidth provider.
fencepost
just a little off
As both someone who's worked at an ISP, and who has worked at a University, what they're doing by disallowing outbound port 25 connections is a GOOD thing, as it keeps spammers from using a throwaway account to originate and inject to open relays.
It also keeps customers from using an outside email service, and anti-spam reasoning can be used to justify anti-competitive practices, exactly as has been done in this case. I think this is cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. Stopping spam does not have to take priority over every other consideration. Shuting down all email servers would stop the spam problem, but it would make email quite a bit less useful (sarcasm). The same thing goes for blocking port egress to port 25. Exercising prior restraint by blocking traffic like this is going to far. Controlling spam is not so important that the ability to choose your email provider should be sacrificed to the cause.
Edith Keeler Must Die
Now what does this have to do with blocking non-MS POP3? I thought we just solved the spam problem.
funny munging
outlook.microsoft.com was an open SMTP server!!
I used it when I was out of town because our university doesn't allow SMTP outside of their own IP addresses.
These are the guys that are going to give you the best service? Come on...
As usual, it's all about money..
"Yes.. no matter what the culture, folk dancing is stupid." -MST3K
Comment removed based on user account deletion
At first when I read the article title, I thought it said, "MSN Forces Outlook POOP." Hmm...
You hit the nail on the head, with they're being wrong to call this "POP3". But then again, the things named by IETF kind of look like trademarks, but I don't believe that they are.
So what's to stop Microsoft from re-defining POP3, SMTP, and all those other T and F LAs to suit their own needs. Has IETF registered them as trademarks? Who can care with enough $$$ to stop Microsoft from pulling this mess, even if it were illegal, and is it?
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
I can't say that it gives me great confidence in their network if they are worried about snoopers sitting on it, though!
And as a Linux/FreeBSD user, I'd have to give them the finger for this. As a state A.G., I'd have to think about starting a whole new anti-trust suit. But if I were a user getting shafted by this, I'd be wondering which would come first, fetchmail supporting SPA, or me figuring out how to destroy Qwest with a backhoe.
Am I the only one who can't tell if the ./ article is just hype and Qwest is merely *offering* a mysterious and unverifiable "anti-spam" service to see if they can sucker you into using LookOut, with no plans at all to abort other users?
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
How is it advantageous to force users to use Outlook for mail retrieval in order to prevent spam?
There may be some decent reason to do it with SMTP, but not with POP. That's simply an excuse to restrict their users to their product...
Do you like German cars?
laugh now.
Ever hear of Boeing Airlines? Of course not.
As soon as Boeing started offerening products and services (airplanes and flight service) the government slapped them on the ass and they split off Boeing Airlines and named it United Airlines.
Sure, one could argue that it wasn't a monopoly (there were manufacturers like McDonell Douglas and services like TWA), however it was highly ANTI-COMPETITIVE.
There are many other examples in [relatively] recent history of disallowing a company that has a large market share in a product from offering services [and thus forcing their product to use the service].
Under those precedents, I have NO IDEA why the government allows MSN to continue to be a part of the software giant MS. That is a blatant mix of inter-dependant products and services that was not that way before.
The real measure of the success of an emulator is virus level compatibility.
Where is Tim McVeigh when we really need him?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
USER jraxis
PASS foobar
STAT
LIST
RETR 1
DELE 1
RETR 2
DELE 2
QUIT
...Was that output by a Microsoft email client or another one? I certainly cannot tell, can you? If Outlook uses some special User-agent like line to verify itself, whats to stop me from including that in a POP session by hand (or by script)?
Liberty in your lifetime
Guns don't kill people, they just make it quick and easy. Microsoft doesn't propagate email worms,...
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
1) MacOS X isn't a monopoly- yet (if ever).
2) MS has been found to be a monopoly.
3) The rules change for someone in that position.
4) The only way Apple could be in that position (Thereby making your argument analogous) would be if they had some 80+ percent of the desktop market like MS does.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Some ISPs will allow you to use third party SMTP servers after you have been with them for a few months.
Now what does this have to do with blocking non-MS POP3? I thought we just solved the spam problem.
It has nothing to do with the non-MS POP3. I have no idea as to why the
No replies made to AC posts. Please log in.
How many people out there actually use the provided e-mail accounts from their ISP for their regular e-mail? I know I did while I was on dial-up (ah, how I miss the handshake of the 14.4...) but that was the last ISP-based e-mail account I ever used, because my ISP has changed so much since then. I can see a normal mom/pop home user using nothing but that ISP email account, but they won't be using anything but a mac or windows anyway.
Linux: The world's best text-adventure game.
Your statement describes the obvious, yet you seem to have missed the point: you'll notice that whenever you give your email address to ANY website that's even remotely disreputable (Yahoo, AOL, Pr0n sites, etc), your mailbox will be overloaded. It's not JUST M$ that's selling out your address. Places that you leave it at will sell it wholesale- this is why I publicize my hotmail account and don't leave my real account lying around anywhere.
I use that hotmail address EVERY time I need to submit my email in order to get whatever I'm looking for - as a consequence, I average between 20 and 30 unsolicited emails a day in that account. My real account remains clean- at least until ebay starts selling addresses to the highest bidder.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They will probably tell their vict^H^H^H^Hcustomers that Outlooks rule sets will protect them from spam. That's what our company's "Exchange group" told me when I complained about the porn spam/potential virus trojan God knows what that sprung out of my "preview pane" on selection. They told me to set up a rule to send dirty word messages to the trash. Great. Oh yes, that clueless moron had remote access to my computers and considered autoexecuting mail "normal advertising". I'd like to laugh but I know how easy it's going to be for malicious third parties to screw our mindless and weak M$ network.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Once again, because this bears repeating, Microsoft licensed Roxio's Easy CD Creator for Windows XP. Roxio is NOT going to go out of business because people aren't buying Easy CD Creator. Furthermore, 99% of people already get the CD burning software of choice with their burner, and relatively few buy it at the store, so your point doesn't hold much water anyway.
Here is my report on Qwest/MSN-you know what they are doing in my area, Phoenix. It is all truthfull, please read. Be sure to check the end of this post for an article on more information.
I am currently a Qwest customer in Phoenix, and have more details on the current situation.
Back in March, I signed up for Qwest DSL Select, which is a $20 per month DSL line at 640 Kbps, 272 Kbps guarenteed. Once connected, you are "always on". You are not guarenteed to connect but once your on you can remain on no matter how long it is. I also pay $20 for the Qwest DSL ISP which is now owned by MSN.
Over the summer I was charged for the DSL modem which was supposed to be free as a promotional gift. Additional charges were also added for services I did not pay for. It took two months to get the charges off and many long phone calls with people saying like "I don't know how to do this," or "I don't think my supervisor will allow."
A week and a half ago, Qwest started disconnecting my "always on" connection after each two hours of connectivity. Then there was a five minute (I call it a penalty) to wait until I could connect again. I downloaded a connection manager, and set it up to disconnect me automatically after every 1 hr 50 mins, and then immediately reconnect. It cuts out the stupid 5 minute wait. I do this for two reasons, downloading and gaming, those are very sensitive to 5 minute lags of course. 10 second reconnects are a miniscule problem in comparison. However I found that I am still getting disconnected every half-hour (with out the 5 minute penalty) and its still annoyed the heck outta me
After the first 5 days of this, I call in asking whats going on, this is not the service I originally agreed to. They say it is part of the plan, but if I didn't like it, I could switch to MSN ($20 a month, which I know still disconnects my uncle tells by the way) and the "regular" DSL for 32.50 a month. HUH? Its the same 640 Kbps line an MSN? what kind of switch is that?
So as you can see they're trying to harrass us into paying more. This was not happening a week ago. To fix this problem I was very smart. I ordered on the day after I called the COX INTERNET and DIGITAL TELEPHONE for $40 dollars a month (you have to buy your own cable modem). In comparison you pay $72 a month with qwest for broadband DSL and phone. They were advertising that on the radio today like it was something great and I know it isn't YOU'RE PAYING about $15 dollars a month more than I have been. IT'S A SCAM. THANKFULLY, I'm getting COX in exactly one week, yes I'm counting those days. I urge every switch to COX now to show them how bad they are.
Now that I told you that, check out the Arizona Republic article. It tells about the scams Qwest is involved in here and Microsoft is also to blame now seeing the new information on SlashDot. They're like about the worst companies around. I know six other people have switched in the the phoenix area to COX because of the same reasons! Share this information because it's true.
It doesn't have to amount to an absolute monopoly in order to be deemed anti-competitive. Do some reading before making stupid comments.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Because they'll restrict outgoing SMTP to any other mail server, and their own mail server will enforce a From: address to be their own domain.
Now, you could use Reply-To: as a workaround for this annoying pettiness, except that:
1. Many mailing lists munge and/or remove/replace reply-to headers.
2. Not all email software makes it clear what the purpose for Reply-To: is.
IE, all outgoing email must be marked as being from their domain, so if you switch ISP's, anyone who replys to any past message will still send their response to your old email address.
Sorry dude, the anti-spam nazi's have made sure that your workaround is nonfunctional. (Which is why I despise their vigilante group.)
I used Linux & Qwest for quite some time as a dialup solution. I got a great package deal on a cell phone, feature-laden home phone, and ISP account. Not bad service on any of them either.
Thankfully their DSL support to my house was non-existent and I have a cable modem. I can ditch the cell phone (which covered as a second line, since the landline was always on the modem) and all the calling features, and just in time to avoid being Borged.
Besides, aren't there plenty of nice email clients for Windows that aren't made by MS? I would think those users are the ones most likely to find this a surprising upset. Linux users are used to getting the shaft on this sort of thing.
I do not have a signature
Some ISPs will allow you to use third party SMTP servers after you have been with them for a few months.
Or rather not use their third party proxies. A "third party" in this context is anything which isn't either the sending machine or something which has an MX record pointing at it.
I suspect that Microsoft is blocking port 25/tcp access from inside their network to outside internet hosts. This would effectively block SPAM and restrict users to Microsoft's mail servers.
Only if they verify their customers' identity, before letting them in. Otherwise they are running a semi open relay in the first place.
I can provide empirical proof that Microsoft is directing all span received to my Hotmail inbox, thus sparing the rest of their users.
And as a Linux/FreeBSD user, I'd have to give them the finger for this. As a state A.G., I'd have to think about starting a whole new anti-trust suit. But if I were a user getting shafted by this, I'd be wondering which would come first, fetchmail supporting SPA, or me figuring out how to destroy Qwest with a backhoe.
The backhoe is what comes to mind first. But in reality, it would be Fetchmail.
But here is another question for you folks: Even if (IF) SPA is the reason and if it can be trusted (not that Microsoft seems to hire a good many design engineers with security backgrounds), why not a solution built on open standards unless, such an open solution is not supported by Microsoft products. This approach MIGHT indicate an illegal leveraging of market power (trying to use market power in the desktop/office productivity market to secure market power in the server market). I think the EU might be interested in this.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Shuting down all email servers would stop the spam problem, but it would make email quite a bit less useful (sarcasm).
Getting rid of third party relays (including ISP provided ones) would also make spamming a lot harder. Though only something this drastic would address software which must use a third party relay (though it could be running on 127.0.0.1)
This is not just in his area. The entire qwest region (i.e. minesota to oregon) is "affected" by this.
If you were on peasant dsl (i.e. $20/mth, dial up to connect, max time on 2 hrs) - > MSN
If you are a new customer, and do not ask for a specific isp (i.e. you are a sheep) you get msn.
If you want to switch isps, you can.
MSN sends out a special modem to their customers. Areiscom or some garbage. It's hooked up through usb and it uses some kind of weird protocol. A cisco 678 can be used in its place, with quite a bit of coaxing.
If you are a MSN dsl customer, you do not have access to Qwest's third party support (i.e. if you have another isp, you can call qwest for third party support, w/msn, you can't)
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
... despite the massive advertising, you're not required to go with MSN. I'm in Phoenix, have Qworst DSL, and use CyberTrails, who are quite reasonable and actually Linux-knowledgable. There's quite a list of other ISPs who can take care of you, too.
Keep in mind that the Qworst/MSN deal actually requires that you use Windows -- even Mac users are No Longer Welcome.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If you're forced to use Outlook to get your e-mail, there are ways to make it as "pleasant" and "secure" as possible.
/. afterall--it shouldn't be too painfull.
Want to use Linux, but need to use Outlook to get your mail? Fine, it's called a Virtual Machine. Run VMWare, load it with Win9x/NT/2k/XP, and either Outlook or the OE that comes with the OS. Put a shortcut to Outlook in the StartUp folder so that launches with Windows, and all you have to deal with is the extra overhead of the Virtual Machine's booting of Windows. Inconvenient but workable and not too difficult to set up.
Maybe WINE supports Outlook/Express? I don't know because I don't follow WINE, but I'm sure someone can tell us. In any event, VMWare with Windows installed would handle it for sure, andf pretty easily. And there's no security threat to your *real* OS, just the one in the VM. And turning off all of Outlook's bells and whistles would even eliminate that security problem. Like I said, inconvenient, but workable.
Even if you're running Windows and don't want the bloat of Outlook/Express cluttering up your OS all the time even when not in use, running a VMWare VM with a light version of Windows installed and Outlook running in that VM would be an option. You can pare down Windows using 98lite from http://www.98lite.net, BTW, making a fully functional install take up as little as 50MB--perfect if you want to run it from a VM for a limited purpose of interoperability. And if your system is that of a hardware enthusiast--hey, this is
Complicated? Yep. It would be much better just to be able to use any POP client. But if you can't, you can still run Outlook through Linux, one way or another, or even keep Outlook off your primary Windows install if that's the OS you use.
BTW, if you run Windows and are "upgrading" to WinXP, I'd wait for 98lite.net to finish work on their WinXP installer. It will allow you to *really* keep all the little bits of OE, MSN, etc., that usually get installed, from ever touching your PC. I currently use their version for Win98SE and am very happy with it--without all the extra junk installed, it's surprisingly stable and fast. Perfect for gaming and all else...
Chasing Amy
(We all chase Amy...)
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
e.g.
Microsoft will provide all MSN services, etc, etc, etc, for a nearly free cost to you and your customers, just sign here. Oh, by the way, it's an exclusive contract, which means you can't offer any other ISP's, such as AOL and all your customers are belong to us.
This isn't the first time I've heard of MSN moving in like this, it won't be the last. This is a diabolical way to lock people into IE, Outlook, etc, and the Microsoft way, for EVERYTHING! Hell, it's like buying cable TV but only being able to watch one channel, which you have to BUY the decoder for your end as well as pay for the service.
Monopoly? You bet! Chances are Qwest had a monopoly on your DSL service already and you didn't care, probably because they didn't require you to use some proprietary software. Now you care. Gosh!
I'd simply write in that I plan to discontinue their service since being forced to support a monopoly offends me. Because, like your, I'm a little fish, they won't care, but I'd write letters to all your local papers, too. Make sure you outline how this is the bad thing that it is.
Who needs Invasion of the Body Snatchers when we have this usurping going on. Best of luck.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I recently got laid off at a leading teleservices corporation that did technical support for MSN. This is because they completely dropped the contract with MSN (for what reasons I have only heard speculation and will not repeat here). I can assure you though that it was not because our standards were not good. Although it sounds like I am tooting my own horn we had probably the best call-center for all MSN service judging by the number of people calling back with ticket numbers started by people in other centers. I also judge this by the way the people wrote up their tickets without specifying what in the hell they did forcing me to go back through all the troubleshootings steps. (end rant)
First of all, MSN has two types of mail. They have the "legacy" POP3 system and the new web-based e-mail. You can find this information at MSN Support Services.
Web-based mail is kind of like what it sounds. It uses the same mechanism (XML over HTTP) that Outlook Express >=5 uses to access hotmail. However the server for @msn.com accounts is different from the server for @hotmail.com accounts. If you have an @msn.com web-based account you can go to http://supportsevices.msn.com/us/oeconfig/ to configure OE and then go to tools accounts and read the server name out of there. Note, this is also true for free @msn.com accounts. Note that only Outlook Express 5 or greater or Outlook XP can use this mail. Obviously MSN Explorer and the hotmail.com website itself are compatible with this.
Anyway, it seems the real issue is that these people would like to use their new MSN POP3 accounts with e.g. fetchmail. To correctly configure Outlook Express for MSN POP3 e-mail you must use the outgoing (POP3) server of pop3.email.msn.com (go figure) or the incoming (SMTP) server of smtp.email.msn.com. Furthermore you must select the "Log on using Secure Password Authentication" option as well as select the option under Outgoing Mail server that "My server requires authentication". You then must press the settings button and be sure it is using the same settings as the outgoing mail server. That is it logs on using SPA with the same U/P as the POP3 server.
Because of this MSN states that you MUST use Outlook to get your MSN POP3 mail. This is not entirely correct. What you must have is a client that supports SPA. Why is MSN doing this? MSN's reason: to reduce SPAM. However they tell customers simply this because most of their customers are rather computer illeterate (especially the former AOL lusers). The real reason is that since they contract out Dial-up Points of Presences (Pops, not to be confused with POP3 e-mail) that either A) they must use the POP3 before SMTP hack, or B) You must login to the SMTP server to send mail. If they didn't do this then any jackass dialing into one of those POPs even with another ISP would be able to send tons of SPAM through MSN servers. There have been plenty of /. articles about this before and anyone familiar with how contracted out POPs interfere with the ability to allow SMTP access to only your subscribers should know what I am talking about.
Now, MSN /could/ have simply kept the plaintext login POP3 and only required you to use a plaintext login for SMTP. However they decided that not only should they require a login for SMTP but at the same time they should require secure password authentication for both POP3 and SMTP. In other words, if they were going to have to have people change their Outlook mail settings they might as well knock out the ability of people to sniff the packets and retrive their users passwords while they are at it.
Problem is that apparently SPA in Outlook is an MS specific thing. Well, what do you want them to do. The only way for outlook to support not sending the login in cleartext is to use SPA. So therefore they enabled SPA on their mailservers and disabled clear-text logins. Of course theoretically they could include some other more open method of secure password authentication for use with other clients, or they could open up the MS SPA protocol. Or they could just say the hell with it because they only officially support MSN using MS software on Windows OSes (which actually does NOT include WinCE, you must contact your OEM for WinCE support with MSN).
Basically all that needs to be done is for other mail clients to support MS SPA. How to do this I am not really sure as I have not put much thought into it as I don't use MSN myself except for free accounts. All the free accounts use hotmail based e-mail.
There is of course another option. You could always "upgrade" your account to web-based from POP3 and then either go to the hotmail website to get your e-mail or use Outlook Express >=5 or Outlook XP to get your email in a real mail client (if you can call Outlook a real mail client, but hey, at least's it better than www.hotmail.com). There does exist a script (PERL I think) for retrieving mail from hotmail but I have looked at that code and it is really really crappy (apologies to the guy who wrote it, but I am sure he also knows that it is nothing more than a quick hack). Theoretically there is no reason that Evolution should not support the MS HTTPmail protocol. Turn on HTTP logging in the Advanced tab of OE properties and then open up the log in notepad. You will notice that the schema is relatively easy to figure out even though to the best of my knowledge it is not published anywhere. Evolution already uses XML extensively and has all of the framework necessary for parsing XML. I assume it also has the framework necessary for accessing an HTTP server in general. Therefore it should be rather trivial to write an MS HTTPmail backend for Evolution. In fact, I am surprised that no one has done so (I guess none of the developers use hotmail). I have toyed with the idea of doing one myself but 1) I use balsa, and 2) I have not done any programming with XML. However now that evolution is fairly stable I may go ahead and write this. Hell, I don't have anything pressing to do until Monday except clean the garage so we'll see. There's never a bad time to learn more programming techniques, and XML is one of the most popular things today so not only would I personally benefit from learning XML but also benefit with being able to access hotmail from evolution. And note well... if I do write this I do intend to support the advertisement properties as best as possible (i.e. opening up a small frame at the bottom and displaying a webpage in it). I know it seems stupid, but hey, they deserve to get paid even if they are MSN. And if anyone really wants to they can just change the code later to take out the ads.
Anyway, I hope this clears up a lot of the confusion people are having with this. I see at this point over 600 comments have been posted, a few reasonable, most along the lines of fsck Microsoft. People, I hate MS as much as everyone here. They are theives and crooks and must be beaten. However, as the cliche says: You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. The only way MS will be beaten is when people stop bitching about them and just go do better than them. Every time I bitch about MS to my mother she reminds me: Then go write something better. While everyone has argued this point to death the bottom line is that in some respects MS software is "better" than open-source/free software. Even if only in the marketing sense of better.
-Dave
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You don't have to use Qwest or MSN as your ISP with DSL. I have Qwest DSL, I have an Indie ISP, most markets have at least 40 ISP to choice from. You can actually save money doing this. How?
Well, here's a dirty little secret that right on your DSL bill each month. When Qwest did it's semi-hostile take over of U S West everyone was looking to make sure the letter of the law was being followed. One of the things that came out is upstream traffic would have to be carried by an outside company. Now some would think the cost of this would be rolled into the $19 ISP fee on your bill. No. They threw a $5 charge into the tax and fee section where no one would be able to find it.
So, really you get to pay 24.99 for your ISP charges.
It should be noted that before Qwest took over U S West was one of the few National ISP's that uses tons of GNU and Opensource. In fact Qwest Internet is one of the largest FreeBSD installations in the US.
I've been trying to submit (what I consider to be) a bug to CERT that allows spammers to KNOW if an account is alive, and being checked.
h oo.com
All a spamer has to do is include a 1-pixel image in the email that has a URL such as:
http://www.spammersite.com/image1.jpg?username@ya
This way, they look at their webserver logs, and they have a pretty list of all the email addresses where people ARE DEFINATELY checking their email.
What's the easy solution? For email clients and web sites not to display any images UNLESS they are inline (i.e. an attachment).
So, SPAMMERs, SPAM away. It seems that (just like the 9-11 attacks) no-one cares enough to stop you. I suggest you exploit it as horrendously as possible, and flood our unsecured email system with loads of crap. Maybe then people will get off their ass and see the system needs to be improved (with SPAMFILTER being the best solution currently: http://www.munts.com/spamfilter/) or else it's just as dangerous as a fully-fueled airplane overhead.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
A demonstration of my point, from the VMWare site itself:
x 5. jpg
http://www.vmware.com/products/desktop/img/linu
Chasing Amy
(We all chase Amy...)
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Sounds like a standard email web bug to me. CERT might be ignoring you, not because it isn't a problem, but because it's already a known issue. A quick google search on '"web bugs" email' gives several thousands hits. There's also been some web bug coverage on Slashdot -- I'm fairly sure that I first heard about them either on here or in comp.risks.
CERT seems to be the only place that exposed bugs get much attention. That was the whole reason I went off ranting about airline safety... It's simple, and anyone can see the problem, but nobody cares enough to fix it.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
SE Portland here. If you had Hevanet, there would have been no hell.
Only good stuff.
Bush's education improvements were
and no, having official correspondence go out under @msn.com isn't an option.
If the users are ashamed to be using MSN for email and/or dialup then why are they?
-- iCEBaLM
Using Worldnet's consumer service as an example:
With smaller regional ISPs even these steps may not be necessary, but it'll vary by ISP. Some hosting providers may also start providing alternatives for connecting to send mail (SSL tunneling, redirected ports, etc.) if there's demand for them.
fencepost
just a little off
Wrong on all accounts. Not to say a sales person might take a short cut and tell you that's how things have to go. It's a change order. All they do is change where the ATM config to redirect your traffic. If an ISP change was a cancel and a new order then old DSL users would get switched from CAP to DMT. Meaning they would have to buy a new modem. (675 to 678). They don't.
As far as connections on the DSLAM there should be no preferential treatment to MSN/Qwest over a third party ISP. If you have evidence of that I'd love to see it since it violates at least one settlement agreement U S West signed with a State PUC/Attorny General.