I would argue that its partially Microsoft's fault for allowing
scripts in email or from web pages to have access to anything on your
machine outside of the message viewer or the browser. ActiveX is not
your friend in these cases.
--Curtis
Dennis Carr
wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Frank Bonnet wrote:
>
>> But to fight spam and all other malicious
>>
problems it's getting more and more sophisticated
>> and
complex to configure every day.
>> It is not a criticism it is
a fact that jump
>> to every sysadmin's face.
>
>> Does anyone has knowing of the future of SMTP ?
>>
Is there some project to replace it by some
>> more secure
protocol ?
>
> I, too, would have to say "no"
to this one.
>
> SMTP is used largely because it has
worked since the standard was
> implemented with RFC 822 back
nearly 30 years ago and it still works, for
> all intents, and in
fact does exactly what it says on the tin. So it's
> not SMTP
that's broken, it's pretty much a) the end users who allow their
>
machines to be zombied as a result of not exercising proper security
> practices, and b) the scumbags who actually generate the crap.
>
> The best we can really do is implement the spam blocks
for receiving,
> unfortunately, and continue the usual practices:
SPF implementations, the
> varying blacklists, etc.
>
> -Dennis
>
>
>
