Subject was: Sudo in Cgi
At 2002-03-17 18:56 -0800, Matt Schalit wrote:
> Mike Noyes sent mail to Phillip and me off the
>list explaining how he's doing some behind the scenes
>moderating of leaf-user to filter out html posts and
>whatever else is on his list of no-nos. It was news
>to me, bu
* Mike Noyes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Everyone,
> I'm filtering our leaf-user list on header Content-Type. The only two types
> that post without getting flagged for administrative action are:
> text/plain, and multipart/signed. Note: this means that posts with
> attachments will not reach
Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/18/2002 09:09:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:(bcc: Phillip Watts/austin/Nlynx)
Subject: [Leaf-user] List Manager filters
Is this change to draconian?
Works for me.
___
Lea
Plain text attachments might be fine. I personally prefer "a long inline
attachments" myself, but that's a matter of taste. In any case, there are
other types of attachment, such as MS Word .doc files, that create both
potential security problems (for Windows users) and inconvenience (for Linux
us
> Is this change to draconian?
I don't think this is draconian, but you can probably save yourself some
list admin work.
I suggest some additions to the auto-responder e-mail:
1) Indicate that attachments (other than a GPG signature) are not allowed,
and instead should be included in-line with
At 2002-03-18 07:51 -0800, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>Plain text attachments might be fine. I personally prefer "a long
>inline attachments" myself, but that's a matter of taste. In any case,
>there are other types of attachment, such as MS Word .doc files, that
>create both potential security problems
At 2002-03-18 09:50 -0600, Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
> > Is this change to draconian?
>
>I don't think this is draconian, but you can probably save yourself
>some list admin work.
>
>I suggest some additions to the auto-responder e-mail:
Charles,
Unfortunately, there is nothing auto about the r
[...]
>
>>NOTE: I removed the part about creating a SF support request. The
>>mail list works the way we as a group decide it should...there should't
>>be an SF support request just because someone can't post with their
>>favorite HTML stationary, add GIF smiley's, or whatever...
>
>I added the
At 2002-03-18 10:56 -0800, Ray Olszewski wrote:
> >Alternate Support:
> >If your employer attaches a footer to all outgoing mail that isn't
> >text/plain, you may submit a support request using the LEAF Tracker [2].
>
>Please forgive my usual absent mindedness ... but what actually happens
>when s
Hi,
I run some mailing lists and use demime to strip html and other
crap out of incoming submissions, both to the list proper
and to the list-request address.
It is my understanding that the latest AOL mail program is
incapable of sending email that is NOT html.
Bill Dudley
> At 2002-03-18 09:
At 2002-03-18 15:15 -0500, William F. Dudley Jr. wrote:
>I run some mailing lists and use demime to strip html and other
>crap out of incoming submissions, both to the list proper
>and to the list-request address.
Bill,
Demime and stripmime are only available to list admins. I'm just a lowly
lis
On Monday 18 March 2002 14:15, William F. Dudley Jr. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I run some mailing lists and use demime to strip html and other
> crap out of incoming submissions, both to the list proper
> and to the list-request address.
>
> It is my understanding that the latest AOL mail program is
> inca
guitarlynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I run some mailing lists and use demime to strip html
>> and other crap out of incoming submissions, both to
/snip/
>> It is my understanding that the latest AOL mail
>> program is incapable of sending email that is NOT html.
> hehe, you can't connect
On Tuesday 19 March 2002 01:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Don't let any of my systems know that, as I've been
> connecting to AOL through various LRP and LEAF
> derived firewalls for a LONG time. So long, in fact,
> that I was part of the original AOL beta when they
> first permitted access fro
14 matches
Mail list logo
