I guess as long as they don't start blocking ssh we'll be ok.
It sure does suck that I won't be able to run my personal website when I 
move into my new house on the cable modem like I used to .  I have been off 
of broadband due to where I currently live for the past 10 months.  The only 
thing I miss using it for is access to storage on my home server, and being 
able to remotly administer the computers at work using vnc without it taking 
forever to refresh.

I remember when we first got cable modems in abbeville back in either 99 or 
2000.  I can remember how it used to be setup with everyone's hostname was 
their computer name and could be browsed by network neighborhood.  It was 
the wild west when cable modems were first rolled out.



Adam J. Melancon


----Original Message Follows----
From: Brad N Bendily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [brlug-general] Cox and smtp pain today.
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:29:03 -0500 (CDT)


They also block port 21 even though they don't admit it.
The link worked BTW.

--
Brad Bendily - CNA


On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Adam J. Melancon wrote:

 > Has anyone seen this link with all the ports that cox blocks?
 >
 > 
http://www.expressresponse.com/cgi-bin/progsnp/cox_isp/srchjnnp?search_type=vdocument&search_input=1570&session_id=1038942585.8133.7&search_erproduct=&question=ports+blocked
 >
 > I hope this link works. ;)
 >
 >
 >
 > Adam J. Melancon
 >
 >
 > ----Original Message Follows----
 > From: will hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > Reply-To: [email protected]
 > To: [email protected]
 > Subject: Re: GPG does not provide "end to end encryption", but only mail
 > conte nt encryption was RE: [brlug-general] Cox and smtp pain today.
 > Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:31:05 -0500
 >
 > On 2003.06.17 09:48 John Hebert wrote:
 >  > Ray,
 >  >
 >  > Just to be technically clear and correct for those who may not know, 
GPG
 >  > does not provide end to end mail encryption, but only mail content
 >  > encryption. Even if you use GPG to encrypt the contents of your mail
 >  > message, it is possible for people (mail sysadmins, bad guys sniffing,
 > etc.)
 >  > to see the message headers (mail recipient's address, etc.).
 >
 > That and it stands out like a sore thumb when you only take the trouble 
to
 > encrypt 1% of your mail.
 >
 >  >
 >  > But, as others have pointed out, TLS only encrypts the connections to 
the
 >  > mail server. Anyone with access to your mail spool can read your
 > unencrypted
 >  > email content. TLS is only a partial security solution and requires 
the
 > user
 >  > to trust the mail server admin.
 >
 > Let's see, the only person with access to the mail spooler on my computer 
is
 > ... me.  If everyone ran their own mail and had TLS, everyone would have 
end
 > to end encryption.  Sure, admins here and there could see who I emailed, 
but
 > that' not as important as them not getting at what I'm up to when I don't
 > want them to know.
 >
 > Some people don't think that's possible or practical.  They are correct 
only
 > when they confine themselves to Microsoft and dial up limits.  Cable now
 > reaches the majority of US homes.  There's no reason everyone could not 
have
 > an always on connection with a fixed IP address.  Free software is secure
 > and has default settings that make mail work without much effort on the
 > user's part.  Oh yeah, a computer running free software is just as or 
more
 > reliable than the dinky little computer that runs the cable modem itself.
 > The only trouble with mail I've had has been from Cox being bullied into
 > making their cable service look and act like a dial up service.
 >
 >
 >  >
 >  > So if you want true message security, don't use email at all. Anyone 
know
 > of
 >  > a good alternative? Are there any free|OSS encrypted IM apps out 
there?
 >  >
 >
 > That is the big problem here.  If you can't trust that your email is
 > private, email loses much of it's value.
 >
 > I like the idea of substituting an IM program for an email program =;)  
It
 > kinda shows how email could be done.  Why is it that people think that 
it's
 > OK to have these IM programs but not email?  Why is it that people think 
you
 > can secure IM but not email?  Why do people think that you need a relay 
for
 > mail but not IM?
 >
 > _______________________________________________
 > General mailing list
 > [email protected]
 > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
 >
 > _________________________________________________________________
 > MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
 > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
 >
 >
 > _______________________________________________
 > General mailing list
 > [email protected]
 > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
 >


_______________________________________________
General mailing list
[email protected]
http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


Reply via email to