The spam is getting more aggressive now. Please make posting to the list available for
members only!
Kind regards,
Ted Lyngmo
Support [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> DO YOU THINK IT'S FUNNY?
>
> FUCK YOU !!!
>
> IYQFLMJTUOHBKVLYTD
Anyone else getting spammed by undeliverable messages?
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager
Hi..
A couple days ago I noticed the beginning of the flood of emails from
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and set it to delete all messages from the address.. Reading through some of
the other posts I notice several mentions still about this spamming message
situation. I know several
hi,
i have sent a message to the list, and some anti spam software that this
user ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) has installed has sent to me an email asking
me to accept it if i really wanted to send the message to him.
what is this? i do not want more spam. it is really annoying.
anti-spam filters are
Hi all!
Does anyone else but me on this list receive a lot of spam like this?
"Could you, please, give me more information about your offers. I'm very interested in
this. My questions is in attachment.
Best Regards
NBRFQQXHNNWCNENLSMXBLCWSBLJUPPMWNLTXCO"
...and also...
&q
> > Doesnt majordomo support a feature to let you allow only people registerd on
> > the list to post and not have to approve them?
> Sorry, what exactly do you mean? Sure, registered users (= subscribers) are
> always allowed to post without approval, of course. That's already the case.
> We talk
At 18:07 14.02.99 -0500, Alicia da Conceicao wrote:
>
>While we are on the subject of mailing list options, is there any way we
>can get the openssl mailing lists to prepend a [openssl-*] to the e-mail
>subject headers, like we get with the old [ssl-users] mailing list, the
>[apache-ssl] mailing l
How about a more constructive approach: Why not filter spam?
Take a look at
http://www.cyberpromo.org/spamfilters.asp
They have an extra section for sysadmin tools which helps
people remove spam mail before it enters email lists.
There is also a program (under Windows) that allows to
send
Anyone having problems accessing ftp.openssl.org as of 21 Feb 2013 noon GMT?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca
God,Queen and country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 amn
Message rejected as SPAM by ANT
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL
Message rejected as SPAM by ANT
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006, laura wrote:
> hi
>where can i find the definition of these functions:
> POLICY_MAPPING_free,NAME_CONSTRAINTS_free,POLICY_CONSTRAINTS_free etc?
> i can't find them in openssl0.9.8b.
>
They are defined through the ASN1 macros. All they do is to free up the
corresponding
"Dearnaley (EXT), Roger" wrote to openssl-users:
> Is there some way to block these jokers from the list?
Since it has nothing to do with OpenSSL, could you please not
discuss spam on this list? Pretty please, with sugar on top?
THX it was driving me bonkers..!
Dale Peakall wrote:
> Would every subscriber in the U.S. please call Novell's toll free number:
> 1-800-453-1267
> and ask to speak to D.N. Johnson about the spam on this list.
>
> It's a disgrace that their software is so broken an
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 09:10:13PM -, Dale Peakall wrote:
> Would every subscriber in the U.S. please call Novell's toll free number:
> 1-800-453-1267
> and ask to speak to D.N. Johnson about the spam on this list.
> It's a disgrace that their software is so broken an
show up here.
The fix is to take these two users off the list. I've asked the list owner
to do that.
-Original Message-
From: Dale Peakall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 2:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Novell Spam
Would every subscriber in the
Here's a procmail recipe that works!
:0:
* ^From:.*[EMAIL PROTECTED]
{
:0
! [EMAIL PROTECTED]
}
:0:
* ^From:.*[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/dev/null
It also tosses the emails so you don't see them. I've been forwarding the
crap back to djohnson most of the day!
geoffrey
--
+++
Could somebody hele me stop this message?
thanks
Ying li
-Original Message-
From: Dale Peakall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Novell Spam
Would every subscriber in the U.S. please call Novell's toll free number:
wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 09:10:13PM -, Dale Peakall wrote:
> >
> >> Would every subscriber in the U.S. please call Novell's toll free number:
> >> 1-800-453-1267
> >> and ask to speak to D.N. Johnson about the spam on this list.
> &g
From: "Randall S. Winchester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
rsw> Actually the openssl-users list software is broken if it will allow
rsw> mailer-daemon email to get posted to the group. This type of bounce is
rsw> supposed to go to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] address.
rsw>
rsw> These are not just Novel.com issu
>It was fixed by
>our postmaster as soon as we were made aware of the situation.
NOT true. I did send a message on January 10th 2001 23:25 +01.00 to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the kind request to solve this problem.
After 24 hours we all still got the Novell message from the list.
I don't conside
After several email exchanges, Brian Muha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has
stopped Stefan's vacation message. He did this even though he disagrees
with these two statements I (repeatedly) made:
1. Vacation messages should not be sent in response to mailing
list mail.
2. Vacation messages
On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 11:40:37AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> After several email exchanges, Brian Muha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has
> stopped Stefan's vacation message. He did this even though he disagrees
> with these two statements I (repeatedly) made:
> 1. Vacation messages should not
From: "Michael H. Warfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm just simply amazed that this is such a big question. The set of
practices enumerated is really not rocket science, it's been
implemented in the classic Unixly "vacation" program for what feels
like ages, and it seems like any newer vacation pro
Readjust your spamfilter,
my spamfilter has marked it as Spam :-))
Regards
Christian
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 10:06:28AM +0200, Aleix Conchillo Flaque wrote:
>
> hi,
>
> i have sent a message to the list, and some anti spam software that this
> user ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) has instal
Yeah, I get the same. I've added this user to my spam list.
Regards,
Steven
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Aleix Conchillo
Flaque
Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2003 6:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: more spam
hi,
i have sent a me
I've complained about this member before (and I block him as well). Auto-responders
(whether vacation or anti-spam) are totally inappropriate on an opt-in mailing list.
If I was the owner of the list I'd suspend him (with a friendly eMail warning).
-- Dean
Steven Reddie wrote on 200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>I've complained about this member before (and I block him as well).
>Auto-responders (whether vacation or anti-spam) are totally inappropriate
>on an opt-in mailing list.
This sounds like TDMA to me.
Does anyone know? I am thinking of using TDMA
but msgs
: more spam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>I've complained about this member before (and I block him as well).
>Auto-responders (whether vacation or anti-spam) are totally
inappropriate
>on an opt-in mailing list.
This sounds like TDMA to me.
Does anyone know? I am thinking of using TDMA
Hi, List!
> At the risk of going *completely* off topic, what is TDMA in this
> context?
TDMA is a "Tagged Message Delivery Agent". It's a nice idea, i am also using it.
Just send the persone once the link to http://tmda.net/config-filter.html,
there is written, how to deal with lists.
Bye, Rai
On 07/17/03 10:06 AM, Aleix Conchillo Flaque sat at the `puter and typed:
>
> hi,
>
> i have sent a message to the list, and some anti spam software that this
> user ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) has installed has sent to me an email asking
> me to accept it if i really wanted to send
t; solution to stop that.
>
> I wouldn't like my company's IT team to believe that the OpenSSL list is
> a virus source :-)
ANY open mailing list is a potential source of spam/virus email. It's
the one downfall to the venue. I haven't checked yet, but if I got
this, i
Hi,
It's the third spam I've received throught the mailing list.
Two words to say : annoying and useless. Amen.
---
Pascal Rodrigue
Analyste de l'informatique
Division de l'exploitation
Service de l'informatique et des télé
mpany's IT team to believe that the
> OpenSSL list is a virus source :-)
:-)
Anyway, I've sent a report to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (origin of the spam) and I suggest all
of you who received this does the same. If you do, attach the original spam emails and
extract the header information o
Louis LeBlanc wrote:
Typically, these trojans are dialers or spyware of some sort that
install themselves when some unsuspecting person opens them. If you
ever have one installed on you, you'll very likely start getting
random popups to some Russian porn site. These trojans are usually
base64 enc
On 02/21/2013 08:35 AM, The Doctor wrote:
> Anyone having problems accessing ftp.openssl.org as of 21 Feb 2013 noon GMT?
>
We had some issues with that server (bad DNS). They now appear to be
resolved.
-Steve M.
--
Steve Marquess
OpenSSL Software Foundation, Inc.
1829 Mount Ephraim Road
Adamst
Can the spam filters on the listserv be updated? Got two today in Spanish and
Portuguese for monetary scams. Anyone else getting these?
---
Scott Neugroschl | XYPRO Technology Corporation
4100 Guardian Street | Suite 100 |Simi Valley, CA 93063 | Phone 805
583-2874|Fax 805 583-0124
Thanks! but i can't use them. The error is"undefined reference to
`POLICY_CONSTRAINTS_free'". i can't find any files including these macros.
=== 2006-12-21 14:47:00 ===
>On Thu, Dec 21, 2006, laura wrote:
>
>> hi
>>where can i find the definition of these functions:
>> POL
On Fri, Dec 22, 2006, laura wrote:
> Thanks! but i can't use them. The error is"undefined reference to
> `POLICY_CONSTRAINTS_free'". i can't find any files including these macros.
>
They are real functions but their definitions and implementation is through
the ASN1 macros.
If you get undefine
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 01:33:17PM +0300, Arne Ansper wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Darryl Miles wrote:
>> Bodo Moeller wrote:
>>> When using SSL_write() over a non-blocking transport channel, you may
>>> have to call SSL_write() multiple times until all your data has been
>>> transferred. In thi
From:
"raffa aste" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
There has been more than a little spam running through this list. Is
there some way we can block the hosts?
I'm thinking a link to orbs may be in order - or perhaps contact the relay
admin and / or the ISP that these jerks connec
IMHO this is quite relevant. If you don't want people to comment on the
spam then how about you show leadership here.
There probably is a way - perhaps a direct tap into orbs - BUT that would
affect us more than them. See - if they ISP the emails are originating
from is in say ORBS the
of my ISP's netblocks, which is
not the way to combat spam.
-- Juha
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Autom
ich is
> not the way to combat spam.
ORBS can be overzealous and may not be appropriate in this context. On the
other hand, any "spite-listing" that they may be doing is usually done long
after many of us have decided to "blackhole" everything from these ISPs due
to the
%-> But, then again, after nearly 18 years of "Internet" connectivity and
%-> constant urging of our fellow employees who remember the "good
%-> old days", we
%-> are fairly close to what one might call "zero tolerance".
Yep, and ORBS' insistence on abusing non-relaying MTAs that have never been
On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, Juha Saarinen wrote:
>
> Yep, and ORBS' insistence on abusing non-relaying MTAs that have never been
> involved in spamming should be covered by that "zero tolerance" policy.
>
> -- Juha
>
Given that the ORBS folks block the MAPS/RSS mail servers it seems pretty
obvious,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>At the risk of going *completely* off topic, what is TDMA in this
>context?
Whoops, I actually meant to say TMDA, which stands for
Tagged Message Delivery Agent. See http://tmda.net for details.
Regards,
Andrew Marlow
There is an emerald here the size of a plover'
Hi,
I would like to request that this list become moderated as it is now
inundated by spam. I have a strict quota for email lists at work (which
also
includes the spam) and after the quota is up I get no more emails for
the rest of the month. Last month it stopped on the 20th.
Mark
Am 20.04.2016 um 01:05 schrieb Scott Neugroschl:
> Can the spam filters on the listserv be updated? Got two today in
> Spanish and Portuguese for monetary scams. Anyone else getting these?
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Scott Neugroschl | XYPRO Technology Corporation
>
> 41
who might have differing opinions from
his own. hopefully, that will not happen here.
in re the recent Brazilian Portuguese (note the 'R$' symbol for ISO BRL rather
than Euro) spam: what was wrong with that posting that should have been caught:
* the IP of origin 52.165.41.104 is an M
> the wider problem case is how non-subscribers are given two-way access to the
> list that exposes so much subscriber info (name, professional affiliation,
> email addr, ...) to whomever. i cannot fathom why the list does not make use
> of aliases so that each subscriber can control what they
es I won't mention appear to be a
continuation of the spamming. We are ignoring them.
If you are a legitimate OpenSSL user who made such a request, please
keep that in mind and try again in a week or so. The last thing we want
to do is discourage legitimate participation. On the other hand,
clean
BTW: this email can easily be produced by addressing your SPAMMER at the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] email address, as specified in the SPAM email itself.
I he doesn't like you (100% percent of the time), you get SPAMMED just a bit
more.
Thanks for your cooperation and have nice day yourselves too.
On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 01:27:05PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
>
> I think I misunderstood that question. I honestly don't know what we
> would lose. Maybe a sense of openness.
>
get someone to moderate the list - problem solved.
vh
Mads Toftum
--
`Darn it, who spiked my coff
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 24 Feb 2004 13:32:40 +0100, Mads Toftum <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
mads> On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 01:27:05PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
mads> >
mads> > I think I misunderstood that question. I honestly don't know what we
mads> > would lose.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:59:37 +0100, "Lyngmo Ted"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
ted.lyngmo> Is it possible to post messages to the mailing list
ted.lyngmo> without being a member?
Yes, openssl-users is completely open.
ted.lyngmo> If so, what would we lose by changing
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:59:37 +0100, "Lyngmo Ted"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
ted.lyngmo> If so, what would we lose by changing that?
I think I misunderstood that question. I honestly don't know what we
would lose. Maybe a sense of openness.
-
Please consider s
Richard Levitte wrote:
> Ted Lyngmo wrote:
> >
> > Is it possible to post messages to the mailing list without
> > being a member? If so, what would we lose by changing that?
>
> I honestly don't know what we would lose. Maybe a sense of
> openness.
True, but considering how easy it is to become
On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 01:40:03PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> mads> get someone to moderate the list - problem solved.
>
> *cough* you do know what you're talking about, right?
>
yes. Allow members to post and only non-members if moderated through -
I wouldn't suggest it if I d
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 24 Feb 2004 13:54:57 +0100, Mads Toftum <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
mads> On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 01:40:03PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
mads> > mads> get someone to moderate the list - problem solved.
mads> >
mads> > *cough* you do know what
> I think I misunderstood that question. I honestly don't know what we
> would lose. Maybe a sense of openness.
In the past -- at least, say, 2-3 years ago -- we had a couple of
anonymous posters who made very worthwhile contributions. Haven't
seen that recently. Also, it used to be in the spi
This chain of email regarding SPAM originated with the topic to reduce
the SPAM in this group email...
The only way to moderate a group email list is to formalize the method
of how it is delivered. If interested people are asked to join as a
member, they can be turned off if proved to be malicious
Rich Salz wrote:
I think I misunderstood that question. I honestly don't know what we
would lose. Maybe a sense of openness.
In the past -- at least, say, 2-3 years ago -- we had a couple of
anonymous posters who made very worthwhile contributions. Haven't
seen that recently. Also, it used t
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Laurie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I disagree.
I've lost the thread... You want to limit posting to subscribers only or
you don't?
BTW, the mod_ssl list has been swamped by some spammer. Would this list
be immune to these posts (the spammer is craftily
Rich Salz wrote:
Probably not worth supporting any more.
Ben Laurie wrote:
I disagree.
Ben's voice carries way more weight than mine :) I stand down...
/r$
--
Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gatew
On Feb 24, 2004, at 9:55 AM, Rich Salz wrote:
I think I misunderstood that question. I honestly don't know what we
would lose. Maybe a sense of openness.
In the past -- at least, say, 2-3 years ago -- we had a couple of
anonymous posters who made very worthwhile contributions. Haven't
seen that
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 11:47:43AM -0600, Scott Lamb wrote:
>
> On Feb 24, 2004, at 9:55 AM, Rich Salz wrote:
>
> >> I think I misunderstood that question. I honestly don't know what we
> >> would lose. Maybe a sense of openness.
> >
> > In the past -- at least, say, 2-3 years ago -- we had a c
makers had realized these messages would
be sent to mailing lists, they wouldn't be sending them at all.
And while spammers _could_ subscribe to mailing lists before sending a
bunch of spam, they typically don't, based on my experiences wit
Have we now crossed the threshold where there are more off-topic
messages discussing spam than spam messages themselves?
There just doesn't seem to be a real need to take any action at all
given the small number of UCE or antivirus bounce messages.
r,
> I think just simply requiring people to be list members before posting
> would be enough to make a big impact.
You dont necessarily have to force people to become members. Just
ensure that all anonymous posts are be moderated, and the problem
is solved. The spam, viruses and anonymous
by my legitimate SMTP relay.
On Mar 2, 2004, at 2:15 PM, L Nehring wrote:
Have we now crossed the threshold where there are more off-topic
messages discussing spam than spam messages themselves?
There just doesn't seem to be a real need to take any action at all
given the small number of UCE or
Boyle Owen wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Ben Laurie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I disagree.
I've lost the thread... You want to limit posting to subscribers only or
you don't?
I don't.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/
"There is no limit to what a man
good number of my posts just got
timed out by my legitimate SMTP relay.
On Mar 2, 2004, at 2:15 PM, L Nehring wrote:
Have we now crossed the threshold where there are more off-topic
messages discussing spam than spam messages themselves?
There just doesn't seem to be a real need to take
> -Original Message-
> From: Scott Lamb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The spammer who zapped the mod_ssl list (see
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modssl&r=1&b=200403&w=2) has now
moved onto this list (see content-free mail apparently from rse...)
Can someone with admin powers block th
e with admin powers block these spams?
This is no spam, but, according to our mail virus scanner, a worm named
WORM_NETSKY.B. Btw, how can a content-free mail be spam? ;-)
Ciao,
Richard
--
Dr. Richard W. Könning
Fujitsu Siemens Co
(openssl-users) This is way off-topic, so let me apologize in advance.
Here's some of my own email numbers to give a piece of my perspective of
the talk about spam on the openssl list and why I just don't see a real
problem.
I run a pair of email servers on a very small domain t
asking questions about how to use the OpenSSL command-line
tool.
openssl-users for anything else.
On Tuesday 02 June 2009 09:02:51 Mark wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to request that this list become moderated as it is now
> inundated by spam. I have a strict quota for email lists at
out how to use the OpenSSL C API.
> openssl-cmd for asking questions about how to use the OpenSSL command-line
> tool.
> openssl-users for anything else.
>
> On Tuesday 02 June 2009 09:02:51 Mark wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to request that this list becom
On 2009.06.02 at 12:15:54 +0100, Rob Stradling wrote:
> openssl-build for reporting build errors with the OpenSSL sources.
May be I should make our autobuilder post results of automated builds
and test on 50+ platforms there? Now I typically first investigate test
failures myself and then send
Hi,
> >> I would like to request that this list become moderated as it is now
> >> inundated by spam. I have a strict quota for email lists at work (which
> >> also
> >> includes the spam) and after the quota is up I get no more emails for
> >> the
Hi,
> > >> I would like to request that this list become moderated
> as it is now
> > >> inundated by spam. I have a strict quota for email
> lists at work (which
> > >> also
> > >> includes the spam) and after the quota is up I get no
> and how do I generate an ECDSA certificate?
To generate a selfsigned ECDSA cert the same ways you do RSA,
except use EC instead of RSA.
- use req -new with EC key or -newkey with EC parms and -x509
to generate selfsigned cert directly.
- use req -new with key or -newkey to generate CSR,
then
o responsabile per queste
evenienze. Il mittente si riserva il diritto di archiviare, ritenere e
controllare i messaggi di posta elettronica.
- Original Message -
From: "BiGNoRm6969" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 7:01 PM
Subject: [?? Probable Spa
Ralf -
There have been hundreds upon hundreds of SPAM messages
delivered to the openssl lists from novell.com. These are
autoresponses on behalf of numerous recipients.
Despite complaints, and claims that the problem was fixed
as soon as it was brought to their attention, Novell seems
unable
http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---
>
> BTW: this email can easily be produced by addressing your SPAMMER at the
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] email address, as
Title: Spam and the OpenSSL User Forum
There appears to be an increasing amount of spam that is being transmitted via this forum. This is in addition to all the virus notifications from recipient servers.
Can anything be done to try and filter this stuff out
The who command is disabled but it looks like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has a spam filter applied that requires a user
to respond with a code in order to send mail to rangeos. I receive
this request every time I post to this list. If my interpretation is
correct, th
On 5/06/2010 12:56 AM, Fares Gianluca wrote:
Hi all,
I’m try to figure out why my X509_REQ signature is always not verified.
I’m using openssl-1.0.0 and gclib.dll provided by gemalto.
It is helpful to actually provide a complete working example rather than just a
subset. However in this case t
Thanks TIM, it works as expected.
On 6/5/10 2:20 AM, "Tim Hudson" wrote:
> On 5/06/2010 12:56 AM, Fares Gianluca wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I¹m try to figure out why my X509_REQ signature is always not verified.
>> I¹m using openssl-1.0.0 and gclib.dll provided by gemalto.
>
> It is helpful to actu
https://www.openssl.org/docs/ssl/SSL_load_client_CA_file.html
Load names of CAs from file and use it as a client CA list:
SSL_CTX *ctx;
STACK_OF(X509_NAME) *cert_names;
...
cert_names = SSL_load_client_CA_file("/path/to/CAfile.pem");
if (cert_names != NULL)
SSL_CTX_set_client_CA_list(
Folks, we're here to discuss using OpenSSL, not email list management.
Junk mail is a a negligible issue for this list. Discussion of junk
mail causes a lot more distraction that the junk mail itself.
Therefore, unless the list becomes substantially dominated by junk
mail, please keep your though
Hi -
I understand 0.9.8a has no FIPs code and we will not have to have it
validated, but rather we are using this in our PDA product to force TLS and
to allow selecting of correct cipher suites and that product will be the
thing to be validated and so since OpenSSL 0.9.8a is not FIPs validated we
PM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: SPAM-URL Re: Another RAND question...
Ummm
have you even looked at the FIPS testing criteria? Have you looked at
the FIPS 140-2 standard? Just because you have a well-known FIPS
company guiding you through the process doesn't mean you're goi
> The part about the PRNG is in question? How did people pre-OpenSSL FIPs
get
> validated when they used OpenSSL? Did they have to modify the OpenSSL
code
> and add their own PRNG that would pass?
Are there any FIPS certified apps that use openssl?
If there are any, the short answer is that ye
How did that SPAM get through?
-blue0ne
http://www.digitz.org
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Jan C Booker wrote:
> then you NEED to check out www.CurrentFights.com a web site FULL of
>Streaming Videos and audio's of the TOP Fights and Fighters of today
> There appears to be an increasing amount of spam that is being
> transmitted via this forum. This is in addition to all the virus
> notifications from recipient servers.
>
> Can anything be done to try and filter this stuff out?
I was going to suggest only accepting digitally
On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 08:41:11AM -0400, Mark Annal wrote:
> There appears to be an increasing amount of spam that is being transmitted
> via this forum. This is in addition to all the virus notifications from
> recipient servers.
>
> Can anything be done to try and filter
Jeremy Smith wrote:
> > There appears to be an increasing amount of spam that is being
> > transmitted via this forum. This is in addition to all the virus
> > notifications from recipient servers.
> >
> > Can anything be done to try and filter this stuff out?
&g
little net.dictators. If *any* IP address
> has *ever* been the source of even one spam, they block anything
> from that IP address forevermore.
Not true! Close your open relay, submit it for a retest and the
server will be removed.
> They won't accept anything
> from Erols, my ISP, a
Yes.
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Fulmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 12:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: open-ssl user using spam filters?
The who command is disabled but it looks like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has a spa
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
