RE: postini spam control
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, at 8:46am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're all talking like it's an either/or situation. Not so much either/or as you've already lost. If, on the other hand, it comes straight to you then it's as secure as it's possible to get with *regular* e-mail. Regular email isn't secure at all. Period. It is already going through an unbounded number of third party networks and systems. It never goes straight to anywhere. Security is only as good as the weakest link, and the weakest link is not Postini. Since that is the situation, having it make one more stop on the way through Postini is not a significantly worse situation. Chris Scharff has the right of it. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, at 11:40am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one gets my MX records but me. Period. There's too much marginally confidential information crossing email these days to make that a practical solution for all byt the smallest shops. The thing is, cleartext email being sent over the Internet is insecure anyway. Your ISP (or their ISP, or the other end's ISP, or ...) doesn't need to be the MX to snoop your mail. The data is already flowing through their network. Don't get me wrong; the problem of confidential information being sent in email is a real one. But the run your own MX thing just seems like you're giving yourself a false sense of security. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
The difference is that it isn't being relayed through my ISP's mail servers. Therefore, to my ISP, its just another set of traffic on the wire. By it passing through a third party mailer, by definition it must be stored before being forwarded. That's enough of a difference to matter, IMO. It is still in the clear so its susceptible to snooping. It just requires more effort to do, and that effort delta is definitely non-zero. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 9:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: postini spam control On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, at 11:40am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one gets my MX records but me. Period. There's too much marginally confidential information crossing email these days to make that a practical solution for all byt the smallest shops. The thing is, cleartext email being sent over the Internet is insecure anyway. Your ISP (or their ISP, or the other end's ISP, or ...) doesn't need to be the MX to snoop your mail. The data is already flowing through their network. Don't get me wrong; the problem of confidential information being sent in email is a real one. But the run your own MX thing just seems like you're giving yourself a false sense of security. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
Don't shoot since I'm just the messenger and we are not a customer but since we just received a proposal from them... The Postini sales pitch tells you specifically that absolutely no email , unless identified as SPAM and therefore quarantined, ever gets written to disk anywhere in their system. Not sure if it's totally believable but that's what they say. They also state that even the quarantined emails are not written to backup so there should be no effect on storage/recovery issues such as those required by the SEC, NASDAQ, etc... Since the good email is never written to disk and you have the ability to log into your company's email that was quarantined, there should be no issue since your email is not exposed to any additional scrutiny or exposure. Just the two cents from them.. NOT ME.. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, March 24, 2003 9:26 AM Posted To: dsm_lists Conversation: postini spam control Subject: RE: postini spam control The difference is that it isn't being relayed through my ISP's mail servers. Therefore, to my ISP, its just another set of traffic on the wire. By it passing through a third party mailer, by definition it must be stored before being forwarded. That's enough of a difference to matter, IMO. It is still in the clear so its susceptible to snooping. It just requires more effort to do, and that effort delta is definitely non-zero. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 9:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: postini spam control On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, at 11:40am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one gets my MX records but me. Period. There's too much marginally confidential information crossing email these days to make that a practical solution for all byt the smallest shops. The thing is, cleartext email being sent over the Internet is insecure anyway. Your ISP (or their ISP, or the other end's ISP, or ...) doesn't need to be the MX to snoop your mail. The data is already flowing through their network. Don't get me wrong; the problem of confidential information being sent in email is a real one. But the run your own MX thing just seems like you're giving yourself a false sense of security. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 954-764-6660 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster, Russell, P.A. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postini spam control
So it's your assertion that it takes more effort to sniff the wire than to sniff traffic on a box one may or may not have access to initially. Doesn't sound right on the face, but not sure it's worth arguing about. On 3/24/03 8:25, Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The difference is that it isn't being relayed through my ISP's mail servers. Therefore, to my ISP, its just another set of traffic on the wire. By it passing through a third party mailer, by definition it must be stored before being forwarded. That's enough of a difference to matter, IMO. It is still in the clear so its susceptible to snooping. It just requires more effort to do, and that effort delta is definitely non-zero. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 9:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: postini spam control On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, at 11:40am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one gets my MX records but me. Period. There's too much marginally confidential information crossing email these days to make that a practical solution for all byt the smallest shops. The thing is, cleartext email being sent over the Internet is insecure anyway. Your ISP (or their ISP, or the other end's ISP, or ...) doesn't need to be the MX to snoop your mail. The data is already flowing through their network. Don't get me wrong; the problem of confidential information being sent in email is a real one. But the run your own MX thing just seems like you're giving yourself a false sense of security. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, at 9:25am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The difference is that it isn't being relayed through my ISP's mail servers. Therefore, to my ISP, its just another set of traffic on the wire. By it passing through a third party mailer, by definition it must be stored before being forwarded. That's enough of a difference to matter, IMO. I don't think there is a real difference. Either way, you're saying you don't trust the ISP (which is not an unreasonable stance). In one case, someone is snooping messages in transit on a server. In the other case, someone is snooping messages in transit on a wire. If you don't trust the ISP not to do the former, why do you trust them not to do the later? It is still in the clear so its susceptible to snooping. It just requires more effort to do, and that effort delta is definitely non-zero. I don't know about that, either. Your average server is typically much better protected than your average network. Mail servers have filesystem access controls, user accounts, passwords, and so on. Violating such access controls will typically leave behind a trail. Plugging a passive sniffer into a hub, on the other hand, leaves no evidence, and is often done as a routine part of network analysis. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
The Postini sales pitch tells you specifically that absolutely no email , unless identified as SPAM and therefore quarantined, ever gets written to disk anywhere in their system. Not sure if it's totally believable but that's what they say. Then they need quite a few servers.. Or they stop accepting connections if they can't handle the mail immidiately. So the important e-mail arrives tomorrow because there's a lot of mail to scan.. They also state that even the quarantined emails are not written to backup Yummie. That's going to be fun if an important e-mail got lost while it was quarantined by mistake. It would be much better if they would rename the attachement which might hold harmful payload and ship it off to the receiver after all. /me wouldn't believe the sales ppl. B. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
You're all talking like it's an either/or situation. The fact is that if you have your mail sent to Postini or some other similar service, it's available both on the wire and on their servers, and to make matters worse there are more wires involved. If, on the other hand, it comes straight to you then it's as secure as it's possible to get with *regular* e-mail. -Peter -- From: B. van Ouwerkerk Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 8:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: postini spam control The Postini sales pitch tells you specifically that absolutely no email , unless identified as SPAM and therefore quarantined, ever gets written to disk anywhere in their system. Not sure if it's totally believable but that's what they say. Then they need quite a few servers.. Or they stop accepting connections if they can't handle the mail immidiately. So the important e-mail arrives tomorrow because there's a lot of mail to scan.. They also state that even the quarantined emails are not written to backup Yummie. That's going to be fun if an important e-mail got lost while it was quarantined by mistake. It would be much better if they would rename the attachement which might hold harmful payload and ship it off to the receiver after all. /me wouldn't believe the sales ppl. B. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This message is private or privileged. If you are not the person for whom this message is intended, please delete it and notify me immediately, and please do not copy or send this message to anyone else. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postini spam control
If, on the other hand, it comes straight to you then it's as secure as it's possible to get with *regular* e-mail. Right. In other words, it isn't. Question: If my mail is insecure in scenario A and scenario B, which should I choose if security of my data is a requirement in implementation. Is the answer anything other than neither? If so, please show your work. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
Yuck... -Original Message- From: Douglas, Josh D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: postini spam control anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. thanks Josh _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
the deafening silence was leading me to this conclusion. thanks -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: postini spam control Yuck... -Original Message- From: Douglas, Josh D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: postini spam control anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. thanks Josh _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
Gonna really suck if your CEO misses an important email and needs it STAT, and you need to go to a third party to get it back.always bad news to take something as essential as email and put it in someone else's control. John -Original Message- From: Douglas, Josh D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: postini spam control anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. thanks Josh _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postini spam control
I disagree with the assertion that it is _always_ bad news to outsource. There are a number of outsourced spam filtering solutions where the administrator can log in and access mail which had been quarantined. That mail can then be released to the intended recipient. By outsourcing the filtering, you are able to save on bandwidth (less mail incoming... Which makes a difference if you're blocking 50k+ messages a day) and the maintenance of the hardware and software is outsourced to a group which does nothing but think about that all day. Similar things can be true of outsourcing e-mail services in general. Certainly outsourcing such services is not appropriate for every organization, but by the same token there more than a few shops which insist on doing everything in house, when all signs point to outsourcing being a better solution for them. On 3/21/03 9:33, John Steniger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gonna really suck if your CEO misses an important email and needs it STAT, and you need to go to a third party to get it back.always bad news to take something as essential as email and put it in someone else's control. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
Agreed - I shouldn't have made the assertation absolute. John -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: postini spam control I disagree with the assertion that it is _always_ bad news to outsource. There are a number of outsourced spam filtering solutions where the administrator can log in and access mail which had been quarantined. That mail can then be released to the intended recipient. By outsourcing the filtering, you are able to save on bandwidth (less mail incoming... Which makes a difference if you're blocking 50k+ messages a day) and the maintenance of the hardware and software is outsourced to a group which does nothing but think about that all day. Similar things can be true of outsourcing e-mail services in general. Certainly outsourcing such services is not appropriate for every organization, but by the same token there more than a few shops which insist on doing everything in house, when all signs point to outsourcing being a better solution for them. On 3/21/03 9:33, John Steniger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gonna really suck if your CEO misses an important email and needs it STAT, and you need to go to a third party to get it back.always bad news to take something as essential as email and put it in someone else's control. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postini spam control
:) FWIW, Postini was initially marketed as an ISP solution.. I know several in town how use it. Not one I've tested, so I can't offer an opinion. A friend of mine works for MailFrontier.. I was planning to take a look at their stuff, maybe you could do it for me and let me know what you think? g On 3/21/03 9:44, John Steniger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed - I shouldn't have made the assertation absolute. John -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: postini spam control I disagree with the assertion that it is _always_ bad news to outsource. There are a number of outsourced spam filtering solutions where the administrator can log in and access mail which had been quarantined. That mail can then be released to the intended recipient. By outsourcing the filtering, you are able to save on bandwidth (less mail incoming... Which makes a difference if you're blocking 50k+ messages a day) and the maintenance of the hardware and software is outsourced to a group which does nothing but think about that all day. Similar things can be true of outsourcing e-mail services in general. Certainly outsourcing such services is not appropriate for every organization, but by the same token there more than a few shops which insist on doing everything in house, when all signs point to outsourcing being a better solution for them. On 3/21/03 9:33, John Steniger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gonna really suck if your CEO misses an important email and needs it STAT, and you need to go to a third party to get it back.always bad news to take something as essential as email and put it in someone else's control. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
thanks, I appreciate the comments. I'll get right on that MailFrontier. :) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: postini spam control :) FWIW, Postini was initially marketed as an ISP solution.. I know several in town how use it. Not one I've tested, so I can't offer an opinion. A friend of mine works for MailFrontier.. I was planning to take a look at their stuff, maybe you could do it for me and let me know what you think? g On 3/21/03 9:44, John Steniger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed - I shouldn't have made the assertation absolute. John -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: postini spam control I disagree with the assertion that it is _always_ bad news to outsource. There are a number of outsourced spam filtering solutions where the administrator can log in and access mail which had been quarantined. That mail can then be released to the intended recipient. By outsourcing the filtering, you are able to save on bandwidth (less mail incoming... Which makes a difference if you're blocking 50k+ messages a day) and the maintenance of the hardware and software is outsourced to a group which does nothing but think about that all day. Similar things can be true of outsourcing e-mail services in general. Certainly outsourcing such services is not appropriate for every organization, but by the same token there more than a few shops which insist on doing everything in house, when all signs point to outsourcing being a better solution for them. On 3/21/03 9:33, John Steniger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gonna really suck if your CEO misses an important email and needs it STAT, and you need to go to a third party to get it back.always bad news to take something as essential as email and put it in someone else's control. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
I don't' think MailFrontier has any AV capabilities does it? That's if you need it. -Original Message- From: Douglas, Josh D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: postini spam control thanks, I appreciate the comments. I'll get right on that MailFrontier. :) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: postini spam control :) FWIW, Postini was initially marketed as an ISP solution.. I know several in town how use it. Not one I've tested, so I can't offer an opinion. A friend of mine works for MailFrontier.. I was planning to take a look at their stuff, maybe you could do it for me and let me know what you think? g On 3/21/03 9:44, John Steniger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed - I shouldn't have made the assertation absolute. John -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: postini spam control I disagree with the assertion that it is _always_ bad news to outsource. There are a number of outsourced spam filtering solutions where the administrator can log in and access mail which had been quarantined. That mail can then be released to the intended recipient. By outsourcing the filtering, you are able to save on bandwidth (less mail incoming... Which makes a difference if you're blocking 50k+ messages a day) and the maintenance of the hardware and software is outsourced to a group which does nothing but think about that all day. Similar things can be true of outsourcing e-mail services in general. Certainly outsourcing such services is not appropriate for every organization, but by the same token there more than a few shops which insist on doing everything in house, when all signs point to outsourcing being a better solution for them. On 3/21/03 9:33, John Steniger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gonna really suck if your CEO misses an important email and needs it STAT, and you need to go to a third party to get it back.always bad news to take something as essential as email and put it in someone else's control. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
No one gets my MX records but me. Period. There's too much marginally confidential information crossing email these days to make that a practical solution for all byt the smallest shops. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Douglas, Josh D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: postini spam control anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. thanks Josh _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
that was my argument to the higher ups -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: postini spam control No one gets my MX records but me. Period. There's too much marginally confidential information crossing email these days to make that a practical solution for all byt the smallest shops. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Douglas, Josh D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: postini spam control anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. thanks Josh _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postini spam control
At 08:38 21-03-2003 -0600, you wrote: anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. This week we talked about putting a Linux box with Sendmail between you and the internet. You can use spamassasin and have everything in house. One of the advantages is that you do have full control about what gets caught and you can always access the probably spam mailbox to see if spamassasin was a bit 'trigger happy'. I did hear (on the SBS2K list) about gfi mailessentials which seem to have a pretty good anti spam util too.. it runs on Windows. B. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
The one strong point I always thought was good for the outsourcing part was that that much less stuff came over my link to the internet..thus idealy helping to manage bandwidth. Now on the other hand I could never find an out sourcer who could give me the granularity I needed/wanted 2 cents bill -Original Message- From: B. van Ouwerkerk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 11:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: postini spam control At 08:38 21-03-2003 -0600, you wrote: anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. This week we talked about putting a Linux box with Sendmail between you and the internet. You can use spamassasin and have everything in house. One of the advantages is that you do have full control about what gets caught and you can always access the probably spam mailbox to see if spamassasin was a bit 'trigger happy'. I did hear (on the SBS2K list) about gfi mailessentials which seem to have a pretty good anti spam util too.. it runs on Windows. B. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postini spam control
Yet all that data is traveling in the clear over the wire? Is the threat of federal prosecution by the government of Bushittia, of those who might dare to intercept the data without authorization what helps you sleep at night then? g Not that this isn't a legitimate issue, or that there aren't other legitimate issues which ought to be evaluated as well before making such a decision... But it the same issues should likely spark a number of other policy discussions and initiatives as well. On 3/21/03 10:40, Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one gets my MX records but me. Period. There's too much marginally confidential information crossing email these days to make that a practical solution for all byt the smallest shops. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Douglas, Josh D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: postini spam control anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. thanks Josh _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: postini spam control
I completely agree. But enough material non-public information graces most companies' email to make me really get the willies thinking about someone else having a copy of all of ti, -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: postini spam control Yet all that data is traveling in the clear over the wire? Is the threat of federal prosecution by the government of Bushittia, of those who might dare to intercept the data without authorization what helps you sleep at night then? g Not that this isn't a legitimate issue, or that there aren't other legitimate issues which ought to be evaluated as well before making such a decision... But it the same issues should likely spark a number of other policy discussions and initiatives as well. On 3/21/03 10:40, Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one gets my MX records but me. Period. There's too much marginally confidential information crossing email these days to make that a practical solution for all byt the smallest shops. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Douglas, Josh D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: postini spam control anybody have any information or tried Postini for their spam control. we have looked at all the major players and we are thinking about surfcontrol but these people called us up and gave a good pitch. I guess we point our mx records to them, which i'm not sure I like, and then they scan it for spam and forward it on to us. I've looked through the archives and didn't find any info, which is probably all I need to know, but I thought I would present it again to see if anyone has any comments. thanks Josh _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
