On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 03:42, Martin Hejl wrote:
> > You will see by yourself, this goes to the list too
>
> I guess it did - but it seems the signature itself was still stripped
> off. But at least the message made it through :-)
Martin,
I suspect the content filters are still stripping the signat
Hi Martin
Martin Hejl wrote:
> Hi Erich,
>
>> You will see by yourself, this goes to the list too
> I guess it did - but it seems the signature itself was still stripped
> off. But at least the message made it through :-)
Yes, it went through, funny that pgp signatures would make it, but then
th
Hi Erich,
> You will see by yourself, this goes to the list too
I guess it did - but it seems the signature itself was still stripped
off. But at least the message made it through :-)
>> I suspect this will address Erich's problem. However, it leaves the list
>> open to nasty spam that's base64 e
Mike
Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 12:37, Mike Noyes wrote:
>> Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
>> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
>> Content-Description: S/MIME Cryp
On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 12:37, Mike Noyes wrote:
> Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
> Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
>
> I all
Hi Mike,
>> I guess this is a little late, since you already seem to have taken a
>> look - but yes, I'd appreciate you having a look and making whatever
>> changes to the list that you feel could help (just let me know if you
>> make changes other than modifying the content filter list - just so
On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 12:01, Martin Hejl wrote:
> > Would you like me to take a look?
>
> I guess this is a little late, since you already seem to have taken a
> look - but yes, I'd appreciate you having a look and making whatever
> changes to the list that you feel could help (just let me know if
Hi Mike,
>> Maybe somebody more familiar with mailman and the supporting tools SF
>> uses will be able to offer some ideas. For now, all I know is that it's
>> best to not send S/MIME message to our lists. Sorry about that.
>
> Martin,
> Would you like me to take a look?
I guess this is a little
On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 19:25, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 14:51, Erich Titl wrote:
> > BTW, Do you know why the list drops S/MIME signed messages?
>
> I just added application/pgp-signature to mailman content filtering
> pass_mime_types. Please let me know if it addresses your issue. I
On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 19:25, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 14:51, Erich Titl wrote:
> > BTW, Do you know why the list drops S/MIME signed messages?
>
> Erich,
> I just added application/pgp-signature to mailman content filtering
> pass_mime_types. Please let me know if it addresses you
On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 14:51, Erich Titl wrote:
> BTW, Do you know why the list drops S/MIME signed messages?
Erich,
I just added application/pgp-signature to mailman content filtering
pass_mime_types. Please let me know if it addresses your issue. If so,
I'll need to modify our devel list also.
T
On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 15:18, Martin Hejl wrote:
> > BTW, Do you know why the list drops S/MIME signed messages?
>
> Same as a couple of months ago - seems to be a side-effect of the
> "de-MIME" function used on the list, to get rid of HTML and possible
> malware. I'm not aware of any way to get pas
Hi Erich,
> Absolutely, I am one of those myself, but keeping information
> undisclosed does not enhance security. I would, in any case, suggest to
> have (if needed) a remote access policy which is supported by
> management.
I agree. My main point really really was: don't try to work against the
Hi Martin
Martin Hejl schrieb:
> Hi Erich,
>
>> Thus you can most probably circumvent _unfriendly_
>> (aka professional) administrators. ( I did not tell you you should ;-) )
> I am one of those "unfriendly administrators" - and anybody who tried to
> pull that kind of thing without talking to me
Hi Erich,
> Thus you can most probably circumvent _unfriendly_
> (aka professional) administrators. ( I did not tell you you should ;-) )
I am one of those "unfriendly administrators" - and anybody who tried to
pull that kind of thing without talking to me or somebody else who's in
charge first (a
Jim Ford wrote:
> It would be convenient for me to be able to access my Linux machine on
> the network at the school where I work, from my XP machine at home
> through my Bering Leaf box. Without flogging through the many Openvpn
> docs or joining the mailing list, I thought I'd ask the question
(again without signature as the list appears not to accept S/MIME)
Jim
Jim Ford schrieb:
> It would be convenient for me to be able to access my Linux machine on
> the network at the school where I work, from my XP machine at home
> through my Bering Leaf box. Without flogging through the many
It would be convenient for me to be able to access my Linux machine on
the network at the school where I work, from my XP machine at home
through my Bering Leaf box. Without flogging through the many Openvpn
docs or joining the mailing list, I thought I'd ask the question here,
as several Leaf
18 matches
Mail list logo
