Re: [OT] base64 messages
2008/7/22 Drake Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Quoth Scott Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 2008-07-21 23:49:16 -0500: PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? That would be Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 in action. This is kind of interesting, though off-topic; is GMail starting to send these out consistently? I've only mostly seen it used for S/MIME. Sorry, I don't know what happened to my message. I did write normal text, but seems GMail sent it base64 encoded as you just said. Maybe my name triggering UTF-8, mixed with other encondings (coming from previous mails on the thread) made GMail decide to just base64 everything and problem solved? Because other than that, I sent the e-mail like all the e-mails I've sent in the last years. and I'm a member of other mailing lists, and this never happened to me before. Tomás
TorButton translation
Hi, I would like to update slovenian translation of Tor Button. So I went to https://translation.torproject.org, registered myself and received only my username and e-mail, and not activation code. So I sent an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - and received Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender message. Any help? bye, Matej
[OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On 2008-07-21 Scott Bennett wrote: On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:24:22 +0200 =?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1s_Arribas?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy b3RvY29scyBpZiBpdAo+IGNhbiBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLiAgVGhhdCdzIGZvciBwcm90b2NvbC1zcGVj [remainder of junk deleted --SB] Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? It's bad enough that some insist upon posting their message along with an HTML duplicate, but at least there is usually some original text content. As per RFC 2045 base64 is a valid transfer encoding for a message body. It was declared correctly in the header, too. What kind of MUA do you use that won't decode this for you? Besides, before complaining about other people's messages, I'd suggest you start with fixing your own. Like, by not omitting References and In-Reply-To headers. Regards Ansgar Wiechers -- The Mac OS X kernel should never panic because, when it does, it seriously inconveniences the user. --http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn2004/tn2118.html
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:02:10 +0200 Ansgar Wiechers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2008-07-21 Scott Bennett wrote: On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:24:22 +0200 =?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1s_Arribas?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy b3RvY29scyBpZiBpdAo+IGNhbiBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLiAgVGhhdCdzIGZvciBwcm90b2NvbC1zcGVj [remainder of junk deleted --SB] Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? It's bad enough that some insist upon posting their message along with an HTML duplicate, but at least there is usually some original text content. As per RFC 2045 base64 is a valid transfer encoding for a message body. It was declared correctly in the header, too. What kind of MUA do you use that won't decode this for you? I'm using mailx(1), which is the SysV equivalent of UCBmail, the staple of UNIX systems for decades. It is safe, reliable, and either mailx or UCBmail is found on just about every kind of UNIX still in use today. It handles mail headers and plain, ASCII text. If you want to use other character sets in private email, that's fine, but it's not appropriate to do so on mailing lists. Besides, before complaining about other people's messages, I'd suggest you start with fixing your own. Like, by not omitting References and In-Reply-To headers. If I were using a news reader, e.g. tin or trn, to read and post to a USENET news group about tor, that kind of thing would be handled by the news reader. However, I'm instead reading and posting to a mailing list about tor. Subject: lines are included, and quoted messages are cited and indented properly. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army. * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Scott Bennett @ 2008/07/22 23:21: On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:02:10 +0200 Ansgar Wiechers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2008-07-21 Scott Bennett wrote: On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:24:22 +0200 =?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1s_Arribas?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy b3RvY29scyBpZiBpdAo+IGNhbiBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLiAgVGhhdCdzIGZvciBwcm90b2NvbC1zcGVj [remainder of junk deleted --SB] Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? It's bad enough that some insist upon posting their message along with an HTML duplicate, but at least there is usually some original text content. As per RFC 2045 base64 is a valid transfer encoding for a message body. It was declared correctly in the header, too. What kind of MUA do you use that won't decode this for you? I'm using mailx(1), which is the SysV equivalent of UCBmail, the staple of UNIX systems for decades. It is safe, reliable, and either mailx or UCBmail is found on just about every kind of UNIX still in use today. It handles mail headers and plain, ASCII text. If you want to use other character sets in private email, that's fine, but it's not appropriate to do so on mailing lists. this is silly, but mailx needs a patch, then. it may have been created during a time when ASCII was all that was needed. but, times change. lot's of other people out there use non-ASCII characters, and UTF-8 is starting to become a standard character set. like was mentioned, the e-mail conformed to RFC standards. if your client can't handle these standards then you are complaining to the wrong people (read: write to the authors of mailx! ;-) ). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFIhnwkXhfCJNu98qARCEzdAKCic9ngtlxLINz13xYP1QJVUmYOuQCeMrto i1rYKNENY2eWSReoJWnzEgU= =Ve0K -END PGP SIGNATURE-
DNS queries through the Tor network
Hi, Just curious to get some expert opinions from the tor maintainers about how to deal with the new DNS vulnerabilities being discussed[1]. Is anyone testing whether or not the DNS servers available via exit nodes are patched? Cheers, Harry [1] http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=4765
