Err, no. If you reject a mail, the SMTP server that tried to connect to your SMTP server (and got a 5xx response) will send a bounce message back to what it perceives as the sender - who is almost certainly forged in a spam e-mail.
I don't think you know what you are talking about.
Sure, if you have a bogus mail server which would just forward random spam, it would do that. But presumably your mail server does not.
Someone has to handle a misaddressed message. The way to handle it is as the OP said, to reject it. That way the sending mail server has the bounce on *it's* head. If it is doing the wrong thing, that is it's problem. The person rejecting has done the best it is possible to do.
Check out http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/ -- he has hundreds of articles that little by little debunk Peak Oil scare theorists. He makes an excellent case, and when I had a moment's concern about peak oil (for my daughter), I saw that and was greatly reassured.
More importantly, a similar procedure could open up a line of communication between the "spammer" and the antispam provider that may allow the antispam provider to force positive change in the behavior of the advertiser.
Do you realize that most spammers completely ignore all laws? You are suggesting the equivalent of a homeowner negotiating with a burgler to limit the amount they steal.
I love linux, but alot of this stuff pretty much pertains to anything on the internet. Do you have a linux box on the public net with SSH open? I gaurantee you are getting more than 1000 attempted logins per day.
I guarantee you I am not.
I block IP addresses after a certain number of attempts at anything, with a custom script. Packaged software is available for the same purpose.
Even then, unless you have weak passwords it doesn't do you a bit of good. And I have very strong ones -- I don't allow login except via SSH public key.
I see. You view the people you talk to as assholes.
Where I work I'd estimate that at least 70% of the bottom-rung underpaid drones are in the same situation as me, they didn't know the right people and there aren't enough IT/CE jobs for all of us so we got stuck enforcing corporate policies.
There are plenty of real jobs, just not for people with attitudes like yours.
Given that 95% of the free tools available on Linux are available on Windows, me think that you've no idea what you're talking about.
You sort of have a point, but...
1) 95% is a number you made up. It is nowhere near that.
2) How easily are the tools found and installed, and how robust are they? There is no comparison with the distribution mechanism and ease of installation on Linux. I know some provide fine self-installers, but some don't.
3) Rarely do they have source you can easily compile.
Free and open source Windows tools are a hodgepodge, and it is major work hunting them down in many cases. Often they are crippled, particularly if they require a service/daemon. If you use a service like TUCOWS, sorting the FOSS ones from the shareware ones is also difficult.
Sometimes you can't tell if you need a tool until after you have tried it. The shareware process is flawed in a lot of cases, and I have spent thousands of dollars on windows utilities that I have hardly used (not for myself, for my clients systems).
I'm not answering, but I am wondering about your subject change to "Washington State Drivers".
I moved to Washington for a few years a couple of decades ago, and immediately noticed that the slow drivers tended to occupy the left lane. The idiots who clog up traffic by cruising in the left lane are a hazard throughout the U.S., of course, but it is endemic in Washington. I have seen a mile of bumper-to-bumper cars following two cars with a mile of open highway ahead of them.
I moved back east, and in Wisconsin noticed that same situation -- going over a hill and seeing a mile of bumper-to-bumper traffic with a mile of open road ahead. A cop passed me on the shoulder, and eventually got to the head of the line where he pulled over the car blocking traffic. As I went by, I checked out the license -- sure enough, Washington.
Next up: national firewalls. The reason Cisco and Google and others only got a slap on the wrist when censoring the Chinese nets, is that the US republicans want to see how well it works first and then start putting it in here under the guide of the Patriot Act.
You actually sounded quite reasonable until you said this.
Won't happen and can't happen. No national censorship has been undertaken, nor will it -- and you have no evidence to show how it is likely to, either.
I was diagnosed with amblyopia at the age five. They tried making me wear a patch over my good eye to force my bad eye to work harder but it was too late. Amblyopia must be caught at a VERY early age or nothing helps.
I must take issue with this, lest someone see it and stop trying for their 6-year-old. It is not nearly as easy to treat amblyopia at ages greater than 5, but it is definitely possible.
I had amblyopia and it was not caught until I was 8. I had the operation, and did years of therapy. It did correct the problem for the most part. While I still use one eye for reading, I do use both for distance vision -- and my eyes do track together except when I am very tired.
A friend of mine had lazy eye when he was younger and was successfully treated with a week of wearing an eye patch and some atropine drops.
Huh? I think you are confused. That is what you usually do after the operation to shorten the muscle which actually does help amblyopia.
I had the operation when I was nine years old, and it was fairly serious. My daughter had the operations when she was 2, and that was outpatient. Obviously surgical techniques have improved as well, but the fact is that it is not amblyopia if it is cured by a week of an eye patch.
The dialogs they will see are EXACTLY the same as they see now. They will have no idea it's a "broker". IE will act more or less just like it does now.
And what would you say the state of windows security is now?
Having things be just like they are now is not what is wanted, IMHO. You want something better.
Fact -- Windows has so many prompts that people get into a yes rhythm. Relying on more user prompts is not a way to security.
When IE 7 wants to save a file to the user's desktop, for instance, it must first "ask" the broker if it can do this. The broker is written in such a way that all actions require the user to confirm this is OK via a dialog box. If the user says it's OK the broker completes the action on behalf of IE 7.
This is very little security.
A lot of users have no idea what any of it means, and are easily tricked. And Windows has so many prompts that even many sophisticated users begin to answer yes without paying attention.
You are very misinformed (which is admittedly not your fault as the US news it trying to make it sound exactly like the way you are taking it).
He is not misinformed. You are deluded into thinking the majority of Islam is "normal and moderate".
This "demonstration against the cartoons" is actually just an annaul holy event. You go there next year, you'll see roughly the same number of people marching there. Its just that some of the Islamic radical leaders are getting up in front of this crowd and railing against the cartoons and shouting things like "death to America".
The fact that the masses attend this stuff without shouting down the "radical leaders" means they co-sign it.
The problem with Islam is that no one will stand up to the mullahs.
There is no moderate Islam, because there is no voice for it. The entire religion is held hostage by the "few radical leaders".
And yes, the Chinese Government does have different values/beliefs and in our eyes they are wrong. In my eyes they are wrong, but they are their beliefs.
Dictators make laws so that they can continue to dictate. Calling them beliefs is ridiculous, wishy-washy, and spineless.
In a November Business Week story, AT&T Chairman Edward E. Whitacre Jr. complained that Internet content providers were getting a free ride: "They don't have any fiber out there. They don't have any wires. . . . They use my lines for free -- and that's bull," he said. "For a Google or a Yahoo or a Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes for free is nuts!''
Guess what, bud -- you don't have any content. So you are even.
I'm glad the Department of Homeland Security has had their budget cut to $16 million.
That's misleading. Their RESEARCH budget for CYBERSECURITY is cut to $16 million, and that's only down 7% from last year, which means under $2 million in cuts.
Not only that, unless you look at the budget lines, this type of number can be totally misleading. For instance, the previous year's budget may have included $5 million in extraordinary expenses, meaning that this year's number actually represents an increase.
Numbers in and of themselves are often meaningless.
According to my calculations (and the output of "openssl speed md5"), calculating and storing the MD5 of all of them would take my computer about 30 minutes and would take up about 20GB of drive space. After which, looking up an ssn from the hash would be fairly easy.
Since using a hash secret to change the digest is just as easy and basic, your point is?
These orginization did not make up the story, they reported what the person said happened.
I said the world is flat -- should NPR report that?
News organizations with their own agenda, like NPR, report unsubstantiated eyewitness accounts. They did it in the supposed "Jenin Massacre", and in many other cases.
That is why I have stopped my formerly substantial contributions to Public television and radio. Their leaders have a political agenda and don't follow proper standards when it comes to reporting.
I am surprised the other biggie is not getting mention here -- consulting and/or going into business for yourself.
I am a 51 year old programmer who has a specialty; I wrote a program, open-sourced it, and have spent the last ten-years supporting it. While I wouldn't say it makes me rich, it gives me a 6-figure income while allowing me to live in the low cost-of-living hinterlands.
Slashdot Mirror
You're joking, right?
If they had not persistently broken real laws, you might have a point. But "speak out and go to jail"? No, trespass and go to jail.
Err, no. If you reject a mail, the SMTP server that tried to connect to your SMTP server (and got a 5xx response) will send a bounce message back to what it perceives as the sender - who is almost certainly forged in a spam e-mail.
I don't think you know what you are talking about.
Sure, if you have a bogus mail server which would just forward random spam, it would do that. But presumably your mail server does not.
Someone has to handle a misaddressed message. The way to handle it is as the OP said, to reject it. That way the sending mail server has the bounce on *it's* head. If it is doing the wrong thing, that is it's problem. The person rejecting has done the best it is possible to do.
But speak out or have a difference of opinion and goto jail.
Name two instances.
Check out http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/ -- he has hundreds of articles that little by little debunk Peak Oil scare theorists. He makes an excellent case, and when I had a moment's concern about peak oil (for my daughter), I saw that and was greatly reassured.
Consider the source. "Reporters Without Borders"? Can you say political agenda twice real fast?
More importantly, a similar procedure could open up a line of communication between the "spammer" and the antispam provider that may allow the antispam provider to force positive change in the behavior of the advertiser.
Do you realize that most spammers completely ignore all laws? You are suggesting the equivalent of a homeowner negotiating with a burgler to limit the amount they steal.
I guarantee you I am not.
I block IP addresses after a certain number of attempts at anything, with a custom script. Packaged software is available for the same purpose.
Even then, unless you have weak passwords it doesn't do you a bit of good. And I have very strong ones -- I don't allow login except via SSH public key.
and I deal with assholes like you all the time.
I see. You view the people you talk to as assholes.
Where I work I'd estimate that at least 70% of the bottom-rung underpaid drones are in the same situation as me, they didn't know the right people and there aren't enough IT/CE jobs for all of us so we got stuck enforcing corporate policies.
There are plenty of real jobs, just not for people with attitudes like yours.
Given that 95% of the free tools available on Linux are available on Windows, me think that you've no idea what you're talking about.
You sort of have a point, but...
1) 95% is a number you made up. It is nowhere near that.
2) How easily are the tools found and installed, and how robust are they?
There is no comparison with the distribution mechanism and ease of
installation on Linux. I know some provide fine self-installers, but
some don't.
3) Rarely do they have source you can easily compile.
Free and open source Windows tools are a hodgepodge, and it is major
work hunting them down in many cases. Often they are crippled,
particularly if they require a service/daemon. If you use a service like
TUCOWS, sorting the FOSS ones from the shareware ones is also difficult.
Sometimes you can't tell if you need a tool until after you have tried it. The
shareware process is flawed in a lot of cases, and I have spent thousands
of dollars on windows utilities that I have hardly used (not for myself, for
my clients systems).
I'm not answering, but I am wondering about your subject change to "Washington State Drivers".
I moved to Washington for a few years a couple of decades ago, and immediately noticed that the slow drivers tended to occupy the left lane. The idiots who clog up traffic by cruising in the left lane are a hazard throughout the U.S., of course, but it is endemic in Washington. I have seen a mile of bumper-to-bumper cars following two cars with a mile of open highway ahead of them.
I moved back east, and in Wisconsin noticed that same situation -- going over a hill and seeing a mile of bumper-to-bumper traffic with a mile of open road ahead. A cop passed me on the shoulder, and eventually got to the head of the line where he pulled over the car blocking traffic. As I went by, I checked out the license -- sure enough, Washington.
Next up: national firewalls. The reason Cisco and Google and others only got a slap on the wrist when censoring the Chinese nets, is that the US republicans want to see how well it works first and then start putting it in here under the guide of the Patriot Act.
You actually sounded quite reasonable until you said this.
Won't happen and can't happen. No national censorship has been
undertaken, nor will it -- and you have no evidence to show how it is
likely to, either.
I was diagnosed with amblyopia at the age five. They tried making me wear a patch over my good eye to force my bad eye to work harder but it was too late. Amblyopia must be caught at a VERY early age or nothing helps.
I must take issue with this, lest someone see it and stop trying for their
6-year-old. It is not nearly as easy to treat amblyopia at ages greater than
5, but it is definitely possible.
I had amblyopia and it was not caught until I was 8. I had the operation, and
did years of therapy. It did correct the problem for the most part. While I
still use one eye for reading, I do use both for distance vision -- and my
eyes do track together except when I am very tired.
A friend of mine had lazy eye when he was younger and was successfully treated with a week of wearing an eye patch and some atropine drops.
Huh? I think you are confused. That is what you usually do after the operation to shorten the muscle which actually does help amblyopia.
I had the operation when I was nine years old, and it was fairly serious. My daughter had the operations when she was 2, and that was outpatient. Obviously surgical techniques have improved as well, but the fact is that it is not amblyopia if it is cured by a week of an eye patch.
The dialogs they will see are EXACTLY the same as they see now. They will have no idea it's a "broker". IE will act more or less just like it does now.
And what would you say the state of windows security is now?
Having things be just like they are now is not what is wanted, IMHO. You want
something better.
Fact -- Windows has so many prompts that people get into a yes rhythm. Relying
on more user prompts is not a way to security.
PS. I can't believe we fried centos.org but not cityoftuttle.org.
It is very difficult to fry static HTML pages on an apache server....
When IE 7 wants to save a file to the user's desktop, for instance, it must first "ask" the broker if it can do this. The broker is written in such a way that all actions require the user to confirm this is OK via a dialog box. If the user says it's OK the broker completes the action on behalf of IE 7.
This is very little security.
A lot of users have no idea what any of it means, and are easily tricked. And Windows has so many prompts that even many sophisticated users begin to answer yes without paying attention.
Peak Oil has been a constant discussion for years. This guy has some very interesting
info:
Peak Oil Debunked
You are very misinformed (which is admittedly not your fault as the US news it trying to make it sound exactly like the way you are taking it).
He is not misinformed. You are deluded into thinking the majority of Islam is "normal and moderate".
This "demonstration against the cartoons" is actually just an annaul holy event. You go there next year, you'll see roughly the same number of people marching there. Its just that some of the Islamic radical leaders are getting up in front of this crowd and railing against the cartoons and shouting things like "death to America".
The fact that the masses attend this stuff without shouting down the "radical
leaders" means they co-sign it.
The problem with Islam is that no one will stand up to the mullahs.
There is no moderate Islam, because there is no voice for it. The entire
religion is held hostage by the "few radical leaders".
And yes, the Chinese Government does have different values/beliefs and in our eyes they are wrong. In my eyes they are wrong, but they are their beliefs.
Dictators make laws so that they can continue to dictate. Calling them beliefs
is ridiculous, wishy-washy, and spineless.
In a November Business Week story, AT&T Chairman Edward E. Whitacre Jr. complained that Internet content providers were getting a free ride: "They don't have any fiber out there. They don't have any wires. . . . They use my lines for free -- and that's bull," he said. "For a Google or a Yahoo or a Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes for free is nuts!''
Guess what, bud -- you don't have any content. So you are even.
That's misleading. Their RESEARCH budget for CYBERSECURITY is cut to $16 million, and that's only down 7% from last year, which means under $2 million in cuts.
Not only that, unless you look at the budget lines, this type of number
can be totally misleading. For instance, the previous year's budget may
have included $5 million in extraordinary expenses, meaning that this
year's number actually represents an increase.
Numbers in and of themselves are often meaningless.
According to my calculations (and the output of "openssl speed md5"), calculating and storing the MD5 of all of them would take my computer about 30 minutes and would take up about 20GB of drive space. After which, looking up an ssn from the hash would be fairly easy.
Since using a hash secret to change the digest is just as easy and basic, your
point is?
I used to have that job, but now I'm on disability leave because of an on-the-job injury: carpal tunnel.
Right hand, I presume?
These orginization did not make up the story, they reported what the person said happened.
I said the world is flat -- should NPR report that?
News organizations with their own agenda, like NPR, report unsubstantiated eyewitness accounts. They did it in the supposed "Jenin Massacre", and in many other cases.
That is why I have stopped my formerly substantial contributions to Public television and radio. Their leaders have a political agenda and don't follow proper standards when it comes to reporting.
I am surprised the other biggie is not getting mention here -- consulting
and/or going into business for yourself.
I am a 51 year old programmer who has a specialty; I wrote a program,
open-sourced it, and have spent the last ten-years supporting it. While
I wouldn't say it makes me rich, it gives me a 6-figure income while
allowing me to live in the low cost-of-living hinterlands.