On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 08:08:22PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:25:38PM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> > Even if exim spoke SSL to the smarthost, the email would still be
> > plaintext between there and the originator. At least, I think that's
> > how it works. If yo
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 at 05:31 GMT, Ron Johnson penned:
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:25:38PM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>> Sure, but everyone has their own limit when it comes to privacy.
>> Maybe I don't want you to know that I have been sending messages to
>> the "hot gerbil sex" mail
On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 22:38, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 at 04:08 GMT, Paul Johnson penned:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:25:38PM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> >> Even if exim spoke SSL to the smarthost, the email would
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 at 04:08 GMT, Paul Johnson penned:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:25:38PM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>> Even if exim spoke SSL to the smarthost, the email would still be
>> plaintext between there and the originator. At leas
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 08:08:22PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> So they know where it came from and is going to. Whoop-de-doo...
Actually that's my philosophy when it comes to all privacy: fuck it.
Come look. If it creeps you out, that's on you.
It's a remarkably effective stance to take.
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:25:38PM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> Even if exim spoke SSL to the smarthost, the email would still be
> plaintext between there and the originator. At least, I think that's
> how it works. If you really want to hide t
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 at 17:59 GMT, Tom penned:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 09:16:55AM -0800, Vineet Kumar wrote:
>> You're using a plaintext pop password on the wire and you're worried
>> about some file in your home directory?
>
> I use the SSL option in my .fetchmailrc, so I hope my pwd and more
>
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 04:05:58 -0500 (EST)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, David Palmer. wrote:
>
>
> > > --
> > > David Jardine
>
> > >
> > The way I see it is that with all the separate componentry available
> > with Debian, you can configure for any eventuality accordin
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 09:16:55AM -0800, Vineet Kumar wrote:
> You're using a plaintext pop password on the wire and you're worried
> about some file in your home directory?
I use the SSL option in my .fetchmailrc, so I hope my pwd and more
importantly email bodies come over the cable modem encr
* Monique Y. Herman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031026 12:10]:
> On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 14:11 GMT, Wayne Topa penned:
> >
> > If you add set pop_host=pop.gmx.net, set pop_user=xxx and set
> > pop_pass= to your .muttrc then mutt -f pop:// will connect
> > without typeing so much. :-)
> >
> >
On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 21:42, Robert Storey wrote:
> > > But even for non-root users of the same system, all they'd have to
> > > do is do 'cat ~/.muttrc', unless .muttrc is only owner-
> > > readable(like .fetchmailrc).
> > >
> >
> > Sure, but that can be fixed, as you say, with permissions chan
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, David Palmer. wrote:
> > --
> > David Jardine
> >
> The way I see it is that with all the separate componentry available
> with Debian, you can configure for any eventuality according to the
> individual need, whether that be for high volumn or otherwise. Standard
> config
> > But even for non-root users of the same system, all they'd have to
> > do is do 'cat ~/.muttrc', unless .muttrc is only owner-
> > readable(like .fetchmailrc).
> >
>
> Sure, but that can be fixed, as you say, with permissions changes.
> You can't fix the fact that superusers can read your
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 04:50:35AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 04:37, Andre Kalus wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:33:30 +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 10:28:26PM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> > >> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 02:39:43AM +0100, Pigeon wrot
Try Animail. I don't see it on the list of Debian packages, but you can
download it from Sourceforge as a .deb binary or source tarball. It is
much easier to use than Fetchmail, and it can delete spam from the mail
server without having to download.
Another option (which I haven't tried yet) is Ma
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 05:41:12PM +0100, David Jardine wrote:
> One problem I had with it is that it gave the message lengths as
> zero, which didn't aid swen-spotting.
I do get the message lengths so this may be a problem with how mutt
interfaces with your particular pop server. It also might b
Try Animail. I don't see it on the list of Debian packages, but you can
download it from Sourceforge as a .deb binary or source tarball. It is
much easier to use than Fetchmail, and it can delete spam from the mail
server without having to download.
Another option (which I haven't tried yet) is Ma
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 23:48 GMT, Ron Johnson penned:
> On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 13:31, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 14:11 GMT, Wayne Topa penned:
>> >
>> > If you add set pop_host=pop.gmx.net, set pop_user=xxx and set
>> > pop_pass= to your .muttrc then mutt -f pop:/
Monique Y. Herman([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
>
> Of course, your password will then be in plain-text in a file. If you
> are the only person with root access, this probably isn't a big deal
> until your box gets hacked, but this sort of thing always gives me the
> willies.
You
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 09:11:44AM -0500, Wayne Topa wrote:
> If you add set pop_host=pop.gmx.net, set pop_user=xxx and set pop_pass=
> to your .muttrc then mutt -f pop://
> will connect without typeing so much. :-)
Additionally, within a running mutt, you could choose to activate a
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 14:11 GMT, Wayne Topa penned:
>
> If you add set pop_host=pop.gmx.net, set pop_user=xxx and set
> pop_pass= to your .muttrc then mutt -f pop:// will connect
> without typeing so much. :-)
>
> This works in version 1.5.4-1 (testing) as well
>
> Isn't linux
Andre Kalus([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
>
> It is very simple - you do not need any config. I just installed mutt
> (from unstable). Then I call:
>
> mutt -f pop://[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> where xxx is my customer number from GMX (you can use both e-Mail
> address and customer
On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 13:31, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 14:11 GMT, Wayne Topa penned:
> >
> > If you add set pop_host=pop.gmx.net, set pop_user=xxx and set
> > pop_pass= to your .muttrc then mutt -f pop:// will connect
> > without typeing so much. :-)
> >
> > T
"Monique Y. Herman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 14:11 GMT, Wayne Topa penned:
>>
>> If you add set pop_host=pop.gmx.net, set pop_user=xxx and set
>> pop_pass= to your .muttrc then mutt -f pop:// will connect
>> without typeing so much. :-)
>>
>> This works i
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 21:41 GMT, Bijan Soleymani penned:
> "Monique Y. Herman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 14:11 GMT, Wayne Topa penned:
>>>
>>> If you add set pop_host=pop.gmx.net, set pop_user=xxx and set
>>> pop_pass= to your .muttrc then mutt -f pop://
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 at 21:29 GMT, Wayne Topa penned:
> Monique Y. Herman([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
>>
>> Of course, your password will then be in plain-text in a file. If
>> you are the only person with root access, this probably isn't a big
>> deal until your box gets hacked,
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 17:41:12 +0100
David Jardine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 04:50:35AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 04:37, Andre Kalus wrote:
> > > On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:33:30 +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 10:28:26PM +
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 04:50:35 -0600,
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 04:37, Andre Kalus wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:33:30 +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 10:28:26PM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> > >> On Sa
On Sun, 2003-10-26 at 04:37, Andre Kalus wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:33:30 +0100, Pigeon wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 10:28:26PM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> >> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 02:39:43AM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 11:33:30PM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 10:28:26PM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 02:39:43AM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> > > > It is beyond my capability (but only slig
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:33:30 +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 10:28:26PM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 02:39:43AM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
>> > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
>> > > It is beyond my capability (but only slightly, I
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 10:28:26PM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 02:39:43AM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> > > It is beyond my capability (but only slightly, I feel, and it
> > > should be very easy for lots of peop
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 10:36:53PM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
>
> And is it only my ISPs getting their acts together or is the flow
> of swens starting to dry up?
>
I've been killing swen at my ISP with mailfilter every hour for the
past 100 hrs (>4d). I get about 6/hr. I don't see any trend
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 08:04:59PM +0530, Sridhar M.A. wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
>>
>> Ron Johnson kindly sent me a Python script that deleted all the
>> large files from the server. All right, I had seen these messages
>> piling up a
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 02:39:43AM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> > It is beyond my capability (but only slightly, I feel, and it
> > should be very easy for lots of people here) to produce a sort of
> > interactive fetchmail that reads the
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 12:54:05AM +0100, Clive Menzies wrote:
> On (25/10/03 01:14), David Jardine wrote:
> > ...
> > ...
> > I've read the fetchmail documentation and concluded that fetchmail
> > will never delete anything without consulting exim or whatever.
> > I've tried to follow all the
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:20:56AM +0100, Brian Potkin wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
>
> > It is beyond my capability (but only slightly, I feel, and it
> > should be very easy for lots of people here) to produce a sort of
> > interactive fetchmail that
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
>
> Ron Johnson kindly sent me a Python script that deleted all the
> large files from the server. All right, I had seen these messages
> piling up and guessed, from the length, that they were all swen,
> although it i
On (24/10/03 22:04), Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 18:54, Clive Menzies wrote:
> > On (25/10/03 01:14), David Jardine wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 10:55:20PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > > on Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:39:11AM -0700, John Yurcik ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > > >
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I asked Earthlink to check for virii [oh the flames] and they said it
> would be an invasion of my privacy but spam they can check. I'm looking at
> your latter option!
sounds like they were planning to manually check your mails for virii
vs an au
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Only if you have a pop3 account, in which case you can preconnect mailfilter
> > before fetchmail to remove most of this stuff from the server before
> > collecting your mail.
> >
> > see various .mailfilterrc files post in the last few weeks. Some
>
Thanks for all the suggestions, maybe with the
exception of sticking my head in the sand, I don't
receive a mere dozen of this...crap, its at least 40
sometimes double that. It's a real problem, and if I'm
going to spend that much time on the computer I want
to be doing something better than managi
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Paul Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 11:26:06PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I asked Earthlink to check for virii [oh the flames] and they said it
> > would be an invasion of my privacy but spam they can che
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 11:26:06PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I asked Earthlink to check for virii [oh the flames] and they said it
> would be an invasion of my privacy but spam they can check. I'm looking at
> your latter option!
That's really
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Paul Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:39:11AM -0700, John Yurcik wrote:
> > Is there something I can do to block this stuff with an on-line mail
> > account?
>
> Demand they reject viruses at SMTP time or take yo
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> It is beyond my capability (but only slightly, I feel, and it
> should be very easy for lots of people here) to produce a sort of
> interactive fetchmail that reads the headers of each message on
> the server, presents them to you
On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 18:54, Clive Menzies wrote:
> On (25/10/03 01:14), David Jardine wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 10:55:20PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > on Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:39:11AM -0700, John Yurcik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[snip]
> > I've read the fetchmail documentation
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 01:14:38AM +0200, David Jardine wrote:
> It is beyond my capability (but only slightly, I feel, and it
> should be very easy for lots of people here) to produce a sort of
> interactive fetchmail that reads the headers of each message on
> the server, presents them to you
On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:39:11AM -0700, John Yurcik wrote:
> Hi, I am glad to be on this list-even if it seems like
> one has to wade through crocodiles to be here. I got a
> yahoo e-mail account because I thought that I could
> manage this junk that accumulates in my mail.
> "Microsoft security
On (25/10/03 01:14), David Jardine wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 10:55:20PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > on Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:39:11AM -0700, John Yurcik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, I am glad to be on this list-even if it seems like one has to wade
> > > through crocodile
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:39:11AM -0700, John Yurcik wrote:
> Is there something I can do to block this stuff with an on-line mail
> account?
Demand they reject viruses at SMTP time or take your business elsewhere.
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson <[EM
On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 10:55:20PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:39:11AM -0700, John Yurcik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > Hi, I am glad to be on this list-even if it seems like one has to wade
> > through crocodiles to be here. I got a yahoo e-mail account because I
on Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:39:11AM -0700, John Yurcik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi, I am glad to be on this list-even if it seems like one has to wade
> through crocodiles to be here. I got a yahoo e-mail account because I
> thought that I could manage this junk that accumulates in my mail.
> "
Hi, I am glad to be on this list-even if it seems like
one has to wade through crocodiles to be here. I got a
yahoo e-mail account because I thought that I could
manage this junk that accumulates in my mail.
"Microsoft security update" always some odd addressee,
142 or 154kb.It doesn't appear that
54 matches
Mail list logo
