Actually they can't search your bag. Nor can a shop owner legally detain you. This is common knowledge. The only reason places still do this is no one defends themselves against unwarranted searches. No one has cojones anymore. All bark and no bite.
Firstly, religion: we must make sure that in our quest to discourage endorsement of a particular religion, we do not discourage religion outright. That is, we must ensure that we accept all religions equally, favoring none.
Quite to the contrary, if you teach anything about religion you have to teach about the lack of religion in its various forms including Atheism. To preach about teaching fairly among the various religous beliefs and not teach about the lack of religion is far and away hypocritical.
How about Apple setting up a referral program from their hardware and software? It could be like a customer loyalty referral program on complete systems like what your Dodge dealer might do for people that refer new customers to the dealership (mine kicks back $50/referral). Apple could send me $50 or 5% of the purchase price of whatever my referral bought. That would be nice. The same goes from lesser hardware. If I refer people to the iPod Mini via my website and they buy one, I'd like a kickback. I think a referral program like this would be a very good thing. I'm all for it.
The slick thing to do would be to create some sort of automated system where the visitor could provide the artist and title of a song to a form on the affiliate's website. The form would spawn a CGI that would query the ITMS website for the specific song and then provide the affiliate-enabled link to the visitor as output. That way the affiliate wouldn't be limited to just the songs they took the time to link to and wouldn't have to field email from visitors that ask for song links. It would all be automated. That would be really slick.
I think it's a great idea and not necessarily trollish at all. I certainly wouldn't mind including a link to a song I like. I'd even write up a journal entry with all my favorite songs via iTunes. I won't however condone people posting messages with their adverstisements in the body. Link to a song in the sig? That's fine by me. Link to your page of links to dozens of songs? That's ok. BS a message full of ads? Nope. Not a chance.
3. Take a defensive driving course. I'd guess you could cover the cost of tuition in less than a year.
FYI, for those that are interested, call you local school district's transportation director and ask about the course. School bus drivers are required to take DD every 3 years (in Kansas, YMMV in other states of course). We're always having to arrange for one of our drivers to take the class some July or August. It takes a couple of days to watch all the videos and answer the questions, usually as a group. It cost our school $30-40/person. It lowered my insurance by about that much the first year. The class is really quite easy if you're a compotent driver (getting fewer and father between these days). I thought I'd toss that out there.
Hey, thanks for the pointer to Amica. They seem to be fairly priced. I had Farm Bureau until I realized they were conning me. I was thinking abotu State Farm for $440/yr. Amica quoted me $314 for better coverage. Not bad. They remind me a lot of the folks that insured my motorcyle before I wrecked it, Markel (and here). Progressive quoted me $1600/yr for my cruiser with no PIP and a high deductible. Farm Bureau wouldn't insure me. Another quoted $1800 and another $1200. Markel charged me $364/yr. Screw the rest. Markely treated me well. Any bad experiences with Amica? Anything they don't cover well like electronics? Farm Bureau claimed they'd cover all my electronics at replacement cost (we're talking hundreds of thousands in networking hardware). I found out later that they limited it to $2500. Good thing I hadn't been robbed in the mean time.
That wouldn't be so bad then. At that point it really shouldn't have been considered a MTA but instead as a simple MUA. Sendmail can act as a MUA, though most don't realize it. Yeah, crummy providers make it hard to work around these problems. We just need to start stringing up spammers in the streets to eliminate the problem.:-)
I actually welcome the influx of infected email from my customer through my servers. Sure it increases load on my hardware but it greatly lessens the amount of I1 bandwidth I have to purchase and negative publicity we receive by having infected customers. Not having to deal with a massive infection after it's affected dozens or hundreds of people makes it easier on the customer too. We simply identify them from our logs, call them, and provide them with the basics on how to cleanse themselves or direct them to the Yellow Pages if they don't think they can do it themselves.
Yeah, SMTP AUTH is the biggest stumbling block IMHO. I don't want to penalize a person or company that's compotent enough to understand the security risks involved with email and who implement SMTP AUTH as a solution. Those folks should be rewarded. The only viable options I forsee is allowing the user to opt-out of said blocks/redirection or telling them to use a VPN solution. The second isn't impossible but it's also not free. The first is more realistic but I don't know how hard it would be to implement or even if it's been done. If it has been done then it's probably some all-encompassing end to end solution from someone like Cisco. They did something similar with LEAP and the wireless products. They offered a kickass solution is the entire setup was Cisco. You'd need a LDAP databse to store the user's opt status in; a way of either getting radius to tell another app that user X just connected or an app that watches the radius logs; an app that can take the info about the new connection, query the LDAP DB to see if that user has specific ACL requirements, and push those ACLs out to the appropriate access or border router. It would also have to be able to reset the ACLs when user X disconnects. Now that's not an impossibility but I don't know of anything that can currently do something like that. It would be a grand solution though. There are LAN implementations of such a thing now where a user auths via 802.1X, the switch queries a DB backend, and acts on the DB response to put the user in the appropriate VLAN. If only....
I agree, those netadms should step up to the plate and take responsibility for their actions, or lack thereof. We finally started rejecting all outbound tcp/25 from our dynamic blocks. I wanted to use simple redirection on our borders to redirect smtp connections back to our MTAs (where we scan for spam, viruses, and perform logging) but Cisco's implementation appears to be inept at doing such a trivial task. Something about not rewriting the source IP no the IP packet correctly. Frankly I've often considered assigning private IPs to customers using our dialup service. I can't think of a reason why they'd need a public IP (as long as we do adequate logging on the backend for accountability purposes).
I've used the DynDNS services before when I was too cheap to pay for a static line when one was needed (it happens to all of us at some point). The service was ok but far from perfect. It absolutely can not be used for a site that depends on its email. Microsoft Exchange caches MX records for domains it has already looked up many times what the TTL dictates. Many versions of Microsoft Exchange also had a bad habit of not retrying delivery after failures such as connections to tcp/25 being rejected (like what happens when you get a new IP and the next person on your old IP isn't running a mail server). Mail is lost in such circumstances. It's a useful way to find your home machine when you IP tends to change while you're away but it's not an adequate solution for running a production server, even one that's a novelty.
If you ISP's MTA is down often or slow to respond then you should complain to them about the quality of service or lack thereof. Using a hack to get around their poor service isn't an advisable solution. Frankly I reject mail on all my production MTAs based on results from the various direct-to-MX DNSBLs and rarely have a false positive. We do not whitelist FPs generated from those lists either. Everyone elses' mileage may vary but we've found that to be an acceptable solution for us.
You obivously haven't got a clue what we're all talking about or SenderID in general. Microsoft requires a license for SenderID and all covered implementations to issue at their discretion. Apache Software Foundation also didn't say it wasn't going to support IETF standards. It said it opposed Microsoft's SenderID *proposal* which IS NOT A STANDARD. Contradicting one's self is not nearly as bad as talking out one's ass, wouldn't you say?
He never said the infected mail was coming from *his* network. It could come from any schmuck that has both their addresses in their addressbook. Still I'm in favor of forcing all dynamic-class users to use their provider's SMTP server. There are a few exceptions of course, such as the user that works at a big company that uses SMTP-AUTH/TLS to let employees securely send email from home. That of course would have to be an exception. Still there are very few reasons why the average dynamic user should not use their providers SMTP server. Statically assigned users however IMHO shouldn't be required to use their providers SMTP server since they are probably running a server themselves. Ideally though the provider would make the system opt-out for static customers. LDAP and Cisco ACLs is the trick.
It's not Apache HTTP Server that would need the plugin. It's SpamAssassin, the dominant spam fighting tool and now an official Apache Software Foundation project.
And getting a few of the big players onboard with MS isn't going to do jack. The top dozen big ISPs are a drop in the bucket in the email system world-wide. Sure they are the biggest ISPs but that doesn't mean their userbase makes up the majority on the 'Net.
Re:In case you don't follow M$'s every move like m
on
Apache Rejects Sender ID
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Correct. It's not a standard at all but a proposal. Hopefully SenderID never becomes a standard. Wong should be slapped shitless for ever agreeing to couple SPF with CallerID. What a stupid move to make.
Upper management? Ha! Let him serve mints, cologne, and towels to the grunts that used to work for him. Or make him into a walking billboard and parade him up and down the street out front.:-) Oh!! I've got a better one. Make him work in the company daycare as the diaper changer. Muh ha haa haaaaaaa....
Slashdot Mirror
Actually they can't search your bag. Nor can a shop owner legally detain you. This is common knowledge. The only reason places still do this is no one defends themselves against unwarranted searches. No one has cojones anymore. All bark and no bite.
Quite to the contrary, if you teach anything about religion you have to teach about the lack of religion in its various forms including Atheism. To preach about teaching fairly among the various religous beliefs and not teach about the lack of religion is far and away hypocritical.
Open your bag. I want to see what's inside.
Step out of the car and show me what's in the trunk.
Take out your checkbook and show me the entries in your register.
I can't believe any intelligent person could take the absolutely idiotic stance you just did.
How about Apple setting up a referral program from their hardware and software? It could be like a customer loyalty referral program on complete systems like what your Dodge dealer might do for people that refer new customers to the dealership (mine kicks back $50/referral). Apple could send me $50 or 5% of the purchase price of whatever my referral bought. That would be nice. The same goes from lesser hardware. If I refer people to the iPod Mini via my website and they buy one, I'd like a kickback. I think a referral program like this would be a very good thing. I'm all for it.
The slick thing to do would be to create some sort of automated system where the visitor could provide the artist and title of a song to a form on the affiliate's website. The form would spawn a CGI that would query the ITMS website for the specific song and then provide the affiliate-enabled link to the visitor as output. That way the affiliate wouldn't be limited to just the songs they took the time to link to and wouldn't have to field email from visitors that ask for song links. It would all be automated. That would be really slick.
I think it's a great idea and not necessarily trollish at all. I certainly wouldn't mind including a link to a song I like. I'd even write up a journal entry with all my favorite songs via iTunes. I won't however condone people posting messages with their adverstisements in the body. Link to a song in the sig? That's fine by me. Link to your page of links to dozens of songs? That's ok. BS a message full of ads? Nope. Not a chance.
Yeah, I've seen other folks do the same thing with their mail. I can weed out the fluff though. I'll have to look into them. They sounds promising.
I'll have to give them a call see put them through some scenarios. Sounds worthwhile.
Yeah, a hands on course would make it better. They probably offer it but for a lot more $$ (liability insurance, facilities and whatnot).
I forgot to ask, who's your co-op insurance with? Someone above you in the thread suggested Amica.
FYI, for those that are interested, call you local school district's transportation director and ask about the course. School bus drivers are required to take DD every 3 years (in Kansas, YMMV in other states of course). We're always having to arrange for one of our drivers to take the class some July or August. It takes a couple of days to watch all the videos and answer the questions, usually as a group. It cost our school $30-40/person. It lowered my insurance by about that much the first year. The class is really quite easy if you're a compotent driver (getting fewer and father between these days). I thought I'd toss that out there.
Hey, thanks for the pointer to Amica. They seem to be fairly priced. I had Farm Bureau until I realized they were conning me. I was thinking abotu State Farm for $440/yr. Amica quoted me $314 for better coverage. Not bad. They remind me a lot of the folks that insured my motorcyle before I wrecked it, Markel (and here). Progressive quoted me $1600/yr for my cruiser with no PIP and a high deductible. Farm Bureau wouldn't insure me. Another quoted $1800 and another $1200. Markel charged me $364/yr. Screw the rest. Markely treated me well. Any bad experiences with Amica? Anything they don't cover well like electronics? Farm Bureau claimed they'd cover all my electronics at replacement cost (we're talking hundreds of thousands in networking hardware). I found out later that they limited it to $2500. Good thing I hadn't been robbed in the mean time.
The details here aren't as profound as I'd like but there is ample material there to thwart your arguemnt. Plus I don't have to type it all out.
That wouldn't be so bad then. At that point it really shouldn't have been considered a MTA but instead as a simple MUA. Sendmail can act as a MUA, though most don't realize it. Yeah, crummy providers make it hard to work around these problems. We just need to start stringing up spammers in the streets to eliminate the problem. :-)
Yeah, SMTP AUTH is the biggest stumbling block IMHO. I don't want to penalize a person or company that's compotent enough to understand the security risks involved with email and who implement SMTP AUTH as a solution. Those folks should be rewarded. The only viable options I forsee is allowing the user to opt-out of said blocks/redirection or telling them to use a VPN solution. The second isn't impossible but it's also not free. The first is more realistic but I don't know how hard it would be to implement or even if it's been done. If it has been done then it's probably some all-encompassing end to end solution from someone like Cisco. They did something similar with LEAP and the wireless products. They offered a kickass solution is the entire setup was Cisco. You'd need a LDAP databse to store the user's opt status in; a way of either getting radius to tell another app that user X just connected or an app that watches the radius logs; an app that can take the info about the new connection, query the LDAP DB to see if that user has specific ACL requirements, and push those ACLs out to the appropriate access or border router. It would also have to be able to reset the ACLs when user X disconnects. Now that's not an impossibility but I don't know of anything that can currently do something like that. It would be a grand solution though. There are LAN implementations of such a thing now where a user auths via 802.1X, the switch queries a DB backend, and acts on the DB response to put the user in the appropriate VLAN. If only....
I agree, those netadms should step up to the plate and take responsibility for their actions, or lack thereof. We finally started rejecting all outbound tcp/25 from our dynamic blocks. I wanted to use simple redirection on our borders to redirect smtp connections back to our MTAs (where we scan for spam, viruses, and perform logging) but Cisco's implementation appears to be inept at doing such a trivial task. Something about not rewriting the source IP no the IP packet correctly. Frankly I've often considered assigning private IPs to customers using our dialup service. I can't think of a reason why they'd need a public IP (as long as we do adequate logging on the backend for accountability purposes).
If you ISP's MTA is down often or slow to respond then you should complain to them about the quality of service or lack thereof. Using a hack to get around their poor service isn't an advisable solution. Frankly I reject mail on all my production MTAs based on results from the various direct-to-MX DNSBLs and rarely have a false positive. We do not whitelist FPs generated from those lists either. Everyone elses' mileage may vary but we've found that to be an acceptable solution for us.
I'd like to hear more about this. Does anyone else have anything to add to this train of thought?
You obivously haven't got a clue what we're all talking about or SenderID in general. Microsoft requires a license for SenderID and all covered implementations to issue at their discretion. Apache Software Foundation also didn't say it wasn't going to support IETF standards. It said it opposed Microsoft's SenderID *proposal* which IS NOT A STANDARD. Contradicting one's self is not nearly as bad as talking out one's ass, wouldn't you say?
He never said the infected mail was coming from *his* network. It could come from any schmuck that has both their addresses in their addressbook. Still I'm in favor of forcing all dynamic-class users to use their provider's SMTP server. There are a few exceptions of course, such as the user that works at a big company that uses SMTP-AUTH/TLS to let employees securely send email from home. That of course would have to be an exception. Still there are very few reasons why the average dynamic user should not use their providers SMTP server. Statically assigned users however IMHO shouldn't be required to use their providers SMTP server since they are probably running a server themselves. Ideally though the provider would make the system opt-out for static customers. LDAP and Cisco ACLs is the trick.
And getting a few of the big players onboard with MS isn't going to do jack. The top dozen big ISPs are a drop in the bucket in the email system world-wide. Sure they are the biggest ISPs but that doesn't mean their userbase makes up the majority on the 'Net.
Correct. It's not a standard at all but a proposal. Hopefully SenderID never becomes a standard. Wong should be slapped shitless for ever agreeing to couple SPF with CallerID. What a stupid move to make.
This point needs some extra emphasis.
Hoorah. Couldn't have said it better myself.
Upper management? Ha! Let him serve mints, cologne, and towels to the grunts that used to work for him. Or make him into a walking billboard and parade him up and down the street out front. :-) Oh!! I've got a better one. Make him work in the company daycare as the diaper changer. Muh ha haa haaaaaaa....