At 9:48 AM +1000 1/28/07, Joseph Armstrong wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Charles Marcus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Questions regarding
Ok, I was done with this thread, but want to make this clear, since I
started it...
And unless there's a specific reason not to provide a failover
mechanism, if I were the programmer I'd probably say thanks for
pointing that out.
Yep - but his point wasn't just that these 2 or 3
I think, we should audit ASSP for security gaps.
Iwill examine the code closer in the next days - but on the
first glance, I could only find this read commands, which are not
evaluated - and which would not lead to any security breach, if the
open fails... But I will have a
Of Charles
Marcus
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 2:42 PM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Questions regarding code-quality and
(in)securityof ASSP...
No, but they can be a highly opinionated bunch of people who are
highly dissatisfied
- Original Message -
From: Charles Marcus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Questions regarding code-quality and (in)securityof
ASSP
Hello,
The comments passed along from SPAM-L seem to me to boil down to issues
with programming style rather than any actual issues with the product.
We implemented ASSP in November, and are extremely pleased with the
results. We've even had one user declare undying love for us as a result
- I've
On 26 Jan 2007 at 9:27, Michael Silver wrote:
Here's an evil thought - they wouldn't happen to be in the business of
providing closed source commercial anti-spam solutions, would they?
No, but they can be a highly opinionated bunch of people who are highly
dissatisfied with just
about
