I was setting up a WAP at home and wanted users to get a warning page before they started using it to access the internet, so I went online to search for a solution and found NoCatAuth. I wasn't aware of any solutions which existed to provide the functionality but it seems like an obvious solution and was sure someone had come up with something like it.
I can see how some software/technology patents might be truly innovative, but if in order to protect those really unique groundbreaking ideas we have to allow patents like this to slip through I believe the cost to society is simply to high to justify the protection of those ideas which are actually innovative.
Every time I get an mMode message spamming me from AT&T I pop over to the AT&T wireless store nearby and encourage everyone in the store to switch to Sprint. I mean we have an existing business relationship with one another... if they can offer me services I don't want can't I do the same for them?
I've called the "customer service" number of AT&T and told them flat out to stop spamming me. Never does a d@mn bit of good. Customer service acts like they've never heard anyone complain about this before and that they have no way to pass along the request.
Fortunately there's an AT&T wireless store next door to Jersey Mike's here in town so I pop my head in while waiting on a sandwich and encourage everyone in the store to switch to Sprint.
As part of an overall spam identification and scoring system, the MS standard and the Yahoo proposed standard are both interesting pieces of the puzzle. They are hardly solutions to the spam problem in and of themselves and unilateral implementation of either protocol as an absolute requirement for acceptance of incomining communication by either Hotmail or Yahoo would likely be met with a varacious subscriber backlash which would result in decision being revered within hours.
RTFA - Microsoft proposes a standard which any vendor can implement and provides a license for its use on the website describing the process. There sis nothing client specific about the implementation.
Parent is +5 interesting? Could anyone who moderated it up provide a reason other than they're bashing MS, that's +1 baby!
+4 "insightful"? How about -4 "clueless". Here is what happens when you actually attempt to send a mail message to a non-existent domain as opposed to FUD that Verisign is reading mail not intended for them.
220 sitefinder.verisign.com VeriSign mail rejector (Postfix) ehlo foo.bar 250-OK 250-PIPELINING 250-SIZE 10240000 250-ETRN 250-XVERP 250 8BITMIME mail from: foo@bar.com 250 Ok rcpt to: foo@nosuchdomain.com 550 : Client host rejected: The domain you are trying to
send mail to does not exist.
Of course this doesn't mean that Verisign isn't Satan's corporate entity.
Alternatives are confiriming the email (respond with this specially crafted string as subject)
Very good friend of mine works for MailFrontier, so I'm predisposed to think nice things about them and their products. However the first time I got a challenge (2 people on the same message) when posting to a large mailing list, I said 'fsck it, I could care less if those people see my e-mail' and deleted the challenge messages.
Interesting concept, but actual implementation has a significant behavioral barrier to overcome IMO.
Easy enough? For a company with 5k users, they likely routinely communicate with 100k or more external addreseses (being generous and claiming only 20 external contacts per user). That's a list of 100k addresses leaving aside any alternate e-mail addresses those users might have. Going to train your users to search for any addresses they might want to add to see if they are already whitelisted and to add entries through as of yet unimplemented mechanism? My users can't fill out a form to get access to a network share properly, now I'm going to be asking them to do this?
If they whitelist my entire domain, then aren't the still susceptable to spoofing? OK, so I work for a small company, but what if you looked at Oracle's largest 100 customers; they'd likely need to whitelist the entire Oracle domain. If I wanted to spam those customers, I'd just forge an Oracle from address.
A tool like SpamAssassin requires much less work on the part of users, vendors and IT staff. Whitlelists might be a useful way to make sure that imortant mail from specific people isn't flagged as spam, but as a primary mechanism it's not particularly scalable.
I have no interest in joining such a group. How long until they post $insanely_large_num of members as a way to try and prove the validity of their method? Bet they'll forget to mention how many members were dragged in kicking and screaming just to appeal placement on the list.
Vice Adm. John Poindexter's wife was my den mother for WEBELOS circa 1978. Prior to meeting the Poindexters I was a big scouting enthusiast. After being forced to spend time with those two, I was out of scouting forever.
Both Vice Adm. Poindexter and his horrible shrew of a wife are bland uninsightful drones. He has made a career out of mediocraty. Never willing to put himself or his career at risk for 'what's right', he's always done 'what's popular'. He is a perfect political animal.
Having many heros who served faithfully in the United States Navy, I am disgusted that this SOB has continued to hold positions of leadership in the modern Navy. I'm not sure how deep his level of involvement was with the Iran-Contra affair, but it wouldn't suprise me in the least to learn he lied and schemed to protect his own ass at the expense of honor and country. To beleive that he would head such a program and as the leader of the department have the integrity to protect the rights of Joe Citizen is something I can't even begin to imagine.
Look, I'm sorry your PC and NT group is staffed by idiots, but when I worked at $vbc we were down for 0 minutes due to the Melissa virus Well, that's not quite true, I stopped the IMS for 5 minutes (which was transparent to users) while I updated some AV dat files.
> 99.9% uptime in an Exchange environment is a no brainer, if your PC/NT group can't achieve that, don't blame the software, blame the "admins".
Yes, I think all of the people forced to march in the Bataan Death March were Jews weren't they? And the Trail of Tears was certainly a group of Jewish Amrican Indians.
DiBona doesn't need to have technical prowess, he's bashing Microsoft. Everyone knows Microsoft is evil... why should we let a little thing like the fact he's absolutely dead wrong get in the way?
Sure, buy into the FUD without doing your own research; DiBona obviously did. There are plentry of reasons to bash MS, this isn't one of them. Folks like DiBona do *nix a disservice by posting this crap.
I make my living off of MS products, but I'm generally sympathetic to the concerns people have about Microsoft. But christ on a cracker, if a "Linux Community Evangelist" can't be bothered to actually check out their facts before launching into a rant it just eats away at the credibility of legitimate concerns about Microsoft's behavior.
Chris writes: "So here's an interesting feature from our friends at MicroSoft. They've decided that Outlook 2000 users by default really don't want to communicate with the rest of the world, preferring to communicate only with other OL2000 users.
Chris needs to learn more about his mortal enemy. This is not "new" behavior, nor does he bother to accurately describe the behavior which actually occurs. The Exchange 4.0, 4.3, 5.0, Outlook 97, Outlook 98, Outlook 2000 and Outlook 10 client all basically work the same way with regards to TNEF and RTF.
Yes it is possible to send to a user in RTF format... if the other user also users Outlook, this might even be a good thing. It's also possible to send to a user in plain text... which is generally a better thing, but the point is you can certainly decide what format to send a message in.
I suppose he has the same concerns about standards when talking about the ability to send an HTML only version of a message in Netscape. Oh Crap! No plain text version that sounds like "subtly breaking standards in the name of improvement".... let's all start planning a campaign against Netscape NOW!
Can DiBona point to a single server which exhibits the following behavior:
This means in essence that unless you are using a 'TNEF Aware' server -- like, say, hmm, MS Exchange -- you may not be able to read your mail. I may be reading a bit much into this paragraph, but it seems to me that this paragraph says 'if your friends can't get your email, it's their servers fault, not yours.'
No, I think not, instead he is just making shit up because FUD is fun. Or maybe he is just too lazy to do any fact checking and decided that since it's Microsoft it wasn't necessary to make sure he was right since everyone hates Microsoft.
The Linux community is not well served by spokesmen who aren't capable of actually making an intelligent argument. There's no shortage of things which Microsoft does wrong, what kind of a dolt do you have to be to miss the mark so completely as he has here?
Does Outlook have problems? Of course it does you stupid fuck. All software sucks. Too bad DiBona couldn't find one of the real problems with it to complain about.
Any linuxsofties out there? Do us a favor and *whap* DiBona upside the head with a rolled up newspaper for being too stupid to actually fact check his rambling crap.
Anyone wishing to discuss it further is welcome to stop by the Ask The Experts booth at the MEC in Dallas next month where I will happily debunk DiBona's spurious assertions for anyone not intelligent enought to figure out he's wrong on their own.
CS
While the folks at SDMI do for some reason seem to be completely incapable of designing a decent web page, the sdmi.org website was registered by SAIC. SAIC has a bunch of ex-military types working for them so it's likely that their watermark algorythms are better than their web design skills.
Exchange 5.5 and later allow for access to the global address list via LDAP, so you can use just about any LDAP client to search for addresses.
Exchange also supports by defaul access via POP3 or IMAP4 so you could use Pine, mail, MAIL, Netscape, Eudora, etc. to acess mail on the server.
Calendaring gets a bit more tricky, but if you really don't want to use Outlook as your default mail client you could use Outlook Web Access (OWA) to access your calendar when necessary. If OWA is installed on your Exchange server it would be accessable at the following URL http://servername/exchange or https://servername/exchange if they're using SSL. (If they're not using SSL, feel free to laugh)
You administrator could also install a script to allow for web based address searches. There's a sample application which does just that here: http://www.cdolive.com
I know this probably weon't make some people happy, but I see this with my own son. When he rents a new shoot 'em up game he seems to be much more aggressive after a few hours of game play.
Knowing this however, it becomes _my_ responsibility as a parent to monitor his game usage and teach him how to appropriately channel his aggression.
Using video games as a substitute for family interaction can lead to problems. Socialization is a learned skill and sitting in front of a video console 4 hours a night takes away from the opportunities to learn this skill.
Does that mean that all of us (myself included) who like to play video games are going to turn into gun crazed lunatics? No, and some groups will try to oversimplify these findings to say that. But there does need to be a balance and it is responisibility of parents to make sure that balance is there.
Slashdot Mirror
Clearly this massive shinkage is due to human activity here on earth. We're now not only destroying our own planet, we're destroying the solar system.
Damn the yankee imperialist dogs for their evil Western influence. How dare they destroy a time honored tradition of selling children into bondage.
When will the West learn that their technology and influence is against the will of Allah?
For things which may be true.
'One time in band camp'....
I was setting up a WAP at home and wanted users to get a warning page before they started using it to access the internet, so I went online to search for a solution and found NoCatAuth. I wasn't aware of any solutions which existed to provide the functionality but it seems like an obvious solution and was sure someone had come up with something like it.
I can see how some software/technology patents might be truly innovative, but if in order to protect those really unique groundbreaking ideas we have to allow patents like this to slip through I believe the cost to society is simply to high to justify the protection of those ideas which are actually innovative.
Every time I get an mMode message spamming me from AT&T I pop over to the AT&T wireless store nearby and encourage everyone in the store to switch to Sprint. I mean we have an existing business relationship with one another... if they can offer me services I don't want can't I do the same for them?
I've called the "customer service" number of AT&T and told them flat out to stop spamming me. Never does a d@mn bit of good. Customer service acts like they've never heard anyone complain about this before and that they have no way to pass along the request.
Fortunately there's an AT&T wireless store next door to Jersey Mike's here in town so I pop my head in while waiting on a sandwich and encourage everyone in the store to switch to Sprint.
I find it hard to believe Jonathan didn't make the list.
As part of an overall spam identification and scoring system, the MS standard and the Yahoo proposed standard are both interesting pieces of the puzzle. They are hardly solutions to the spam problem in and of themselves and unilateral implementation of either protocol as an absolute requirement for acceptance of incomining communication by either Hotmail or Yahoo would likely be met with a varacious subscriber backlash which would result in decision being revered within hours.
RTFA - Microsoft proposes a standard which any vendor can implement and provides a license for its use on the website describing the process. There sis nothing client specific about the implementation.
Parent is +5 interesting? Could anyone who moderated it up provide a reason other than they're bashing MS, that's +1 baby!
+4 "insightful"? How about -4 "clueless". Here is what happens when you actually attempt to send a mail message to a non-existent domain as opposed to FUD that Verisign is reading mail not intended for them.
220 sitefinder.verisign.com VeriSign mail rejector (Postfix)
ehlo foo.bar
250-OK
250-PIPELINING
250-SIZE 10240000
250-ETRN
250-XVERP
250 8BITMIME
mail from: foo@bar.com
250 Ok
rcpt to: foo@nosuchdomain.com
550 : Client host rejected: The domain you are trying to
send mail to does not exist.
Of course this doesn't mean that Verisign isn't Satan's corporate entity.
Very good friend of mine works for MailFrontier, so I'm predisposed to think nice things about them and their products. However the first time I got a challenge (2 people on the same message) when posting to a large mailing list, I said 'fsck it, I could care less if those people see my e-mail' and deleted the challenge messages.
Interesting concept, but actual implementation has a significant behavioral barrier to overcome IMO.
Easy enough? For a company with 5k users, they likely routinely communicate with 100k or more external addreseses (being generous and claiming only 20 external contacts per user). That's a list of 100k addresses leaving aside any alternate e-mail addresses those users might have. Going to train your users to search for any addresses they might want to add to see if they are already whitelisted and to add entries through as of yet unimplemented mechanism? My users can't fill out a form to get access to a network share properly, now I'm going to be asking them to do this?
If they whitelist my entire domain, then aren't the still susceptable to spoofing? OK, so I work for a small company, but what if you looked at Oracle's largest 100 customers; they'd likely need to whitelist the entire Oracle domain. If I wanted to spam those customers, I'd just forge an Oracle from address.
A tool like SpamAssassin requires much less work on the part of users, vendors and IT staff. Whitlelists might be a useful way to make sure that imortant mail from specific people isn't flagged as spam, but as a primary mechanism it's not particularly scalable.
I have no interest in joining such a group. How long until they post $insanely_large_num of members as a way to try and prove the validity of their method? Bet they'll forget to mention how many members were dragged in kicking and screaming just to appeal placement on the list.
Vice Adm. John Poindexter's wife was my den mother for WEBELOS circa 1978. Prior to meeting the Poindexters I was a big scouting enthusiast. After being forced to spend time with those two, I was out of scouting forever.
Both Vice Adm. Poindexter and his horrible shrew of a wife are bland uninsightful drones. He has made a career out of mediocraty. Never willing to put himself or his career at risk for 'what's right', he's always done 'what's popular'. He is a perfect political animal.
Having many heros who served faithfully in the United States Navy, I am disgusted that this SOB has continued to hold positions of leadership in the modern Navy. I'm not sure how deep his level of involvement was with the Iran-Contra affair, but it wouldn't suprise me in the least to learn he lied and schemed to protect his own ass at the expense of honor and country. To beleive that he would head such a program and as the leader of the department have the integrity to protect the rights of Joe Citizen is something I can't even begin to imagine.
All your secrets are belong to us.
Of course they are... we're boycotting them.
Lusers.
Yeah, and the 120 souls who made it to the OpenMail conference this year in Florida speak volumes about it's market share.
Oh... and the latest version of Exchange doesn't use an SQL Server backend.
Look, I'm sorry your PC and NT group is staffed by idiots, but when I worked at $vbc we were down for 0 minutes due to the Melissa virus Well, that's not quite true, I stopped the IMS for 5 minutes (which was transparent to users) while I updated some AV dat files.
> 99.9% uptime in an Exchange environment is a no brainer, if your PC/NT group can't achieve that, don't blame the software, blame the "admins".
Yes, I think all of the people forced to march in the Bataan Death March were Jews weren't they? And the Trail of Tears was certainly a group of Jewish Amrican Indians.
</sarscam>
What book or two were you reading?
It's not on by default in Exchange... rather it sounds like your Exchange admin is an idiot.
DiBona doesn't need to have technical prowess, he's bashing Microsoft. Everyone knows Microsoft is evil... why should we let a little thing like the fact he's absolutely dead wrong get in the way?
Sure, buy into the FUD without doing your own research; DiBona obviously did. There are plentry of reasons to bash MS, this isn't one of them. Folks like DiBona do *nix a disservice by posting this crap.
I make my living off of MS products, but I'm generally sympathetic to the concerns people have about Microsoft. But christ on a cracker, if a "Linux Community Evangelist" can't be bothered to actually check out their facts before launching into a rant it just eats away at the credibility of legitimate concerns about Microsoft's behavior.
Yes it is possible to send to a user in RTF format... if the other user also users Outlook, this might even be a good thing. It's also possible to send to a user in plain text... which is generally a better thing, but the point is you can certainly decide what format to send a message in.
I suppose he has the same concerns about standards when talking about the ability to send an HTML only version of a message in Netscape. Oh Crap! No plain text version that sounds like "subtly breaking standards in the name of improvement".... let's all start planning a campaign against Netscape NOW!
Can DiBona point to a single server which exhibits the following behavior: No, I think not, instead he is just making shit up because FUD is fun. Or maybe he is just too lazy to do any fact checking and decided that since it's Microsoft it wasn't necessary to make sure he was right since everyone hates Microsoft.
The Linux community is not well served by spokesmen who aren't capable of actually making an intelligent argument. There's no shortage of things which Microsoft does wrong, what kind of a dolt do you have to be to miss the mark so completely as he has here?
Does Outlook have problems? Of course it does you stupid fuck. All software sucks. Too bad DiBona couldn't find one of the real problems with it to complain about.
Any linuxsofties out there? Do us a favor and *whap* DiBona upside the head with a rolled up newspaper for being too stupid to actually fact check his rambling crap. Anyone wishing to discuss it further is welcome to stop by the Ask The Experts booth at the MEC in Dallas next month where I will happily debunk DiBona's spurious assertions for anyone not intelligent enought to figure out he's wrong on their own. CS
While the folks at SDMI do for some reason seem to be completely incapable of designing a decent web page, the sdmi.org website was registered by SAIC. SAIC has a bunch of ex-military types working for them so it's likely that their watermark algorythms are better than their web design skills.
Exchange 5.5 and later allow for access to the global address list via LDAP, so you can use just about any LDAP client to search for addresses.
Exchange also supports by defaul access via POP3 or IMAP4 so you could use Pine, mail, MAIL, Netscape, Eudora, etc. to acess mail on the server.
Calendaring gets a bit more tricky, but if you really don't want to use Outlook as your default mail client you could use Outlook Web Access (OWA) to access your calendar when necessary. If OWA is installed on your Exchange server it would be accessable at the following URL http://servername/exchange or https://servername/exchange if they're using SSL. (If they're not using SSL, feel free to laugh)
You administrator could also install a script to allow for web based address searches. There's a sample application which does just that here: http://www.cdolive.com
I know this probably weon't make some people happy, but I see this with my own son. When he rents a new shoot 'em up game he seems to be much more aggressive after a few hours of game play.
Knowing this however, it becomes _my_ responsibility as a parent to monitor his game usage and teach him how to appropriately channel his aggression.
Using video games as a substitute for family interaction can lead to problems. Socialization is a learned skill and sitting in front of a video console 4 hours a night takes away from the opportunities to learn this skill.
Does that mean that all of us (myself included) who like to play video games are going to turn into gun crazed lunatics? No, and some groups will try to oversimplify these findings to say that. But there does need to be a balance and it is responisibility of parents to make sure that balance is there.