[liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Yosem Companys
Hi All, We have revised the Liberationtech mailing list guidelines to restrict the sending of attachments to avoid viruses and spyware (#6 below). A big thanks to Brian Conley and Nathan of Guardian Project for helping compose the text. Best, Yosem * Moderation Guidelines: We've had an

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)
On 8/3/12 9:07 PM, Yosem Companys wrote: > Hi All, > [...] > > 5. The Liberationtech mailing list archives are private to the extent > that only list members can access these archives. But do we have a leak breaking the policy? http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Omer Gibreel
UniversityMaster Candidate of Management Information System > Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 21:15:17 +0200 > From: li...@infosecurity.ch > To: liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu > Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Steven Clift
FYI - If folks are interested in alternative open source online group software, we use http://GroupServer.org via http://OnlineGroups.Net. See It places attachments on the server (where if malicious could be removed) which makes it really handy for lower bandwidth environments. Example online com

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Katrin Verclas
Looks like the mobileactive.org discussion list guidelines. Verbatim, in fact, until #6. Which I will, in turn, appropriate... :) Katrin On Aug 3, 2012, at 3:07 PM, Yosem Companys wrote: > Hi All, > > We have revised the Liberationtech mailing list guidelines to restrict the > sending of at

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Brian Conley
#6 being my adapted appropriation of Tibet Action Insititute's: https://tibetaction.net/detach-from-attachments/ On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Katrin Verclas wrote: > Looks like the mobileactive.org discussion list guidelines. Verbatim, in > fact, until #6. Which I will, in turn, appropriate...

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Douglas Lucas
Perhaps the mentions of Dropbox and Google Docs could be accompanied by caveats regarding using those sites or links to caveats. ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, plea

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Karin Kosina
Hi, Many thanks, Yosem, Brian and Nathan for this initiative! > Any sharing that needs to be done can use public Google Docs > or Dropbox links. This may be a silly question, but how exactly does downloading something from a a Dropbox link differ from downloading an email attachment? The basic i

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Omer Gibreel
iberationtech@lists.stanford.edu > Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines > > Hi, > > Many thanks, Yosem, Brian and Nathan for this initiative! > > > Any sharing that needs to be done can use public Google Docs > > or Dropbox links.

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Greg Norcie
Seoul National University > Master Candidate of Management Information System > > > > / > / > > > >> Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 23:42:54 +0200 >> From: ky...@kyrah.net >> To: liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu >>

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-03 Thread Omer Gibreel
> Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 21:32:21 -0700 > From: g...@norcie.com > To: liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu > Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines > > This is a good l

Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech Mailing List Guidelines

2012-08-04 Thread Seth David Schoen
Greg Norcie writes: > This is a good logic, but there is still a problem even if Google scans > uploads. > > Both state and nonstate actors often use zero day vulnerabilities. Since > a zero day has never been seen before, there is no signature for it in > any virus database. This is totally tru