On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 09:06:01AM +1000, Steven Reddie wrote:
> Perhaps blocking attachments on the current lists, and setting up an
> additional openssl-patches list that accepts attachments would work. Most
> people would not bother subscribing to the patches list anyway.
>
> Steven
>
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Doug Kaufman
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Geoff Thorpe wrote:
>
> > I would personally +1 any proposal to have the listserver block any posts
> > that;
> > (a) contain attachments
> > (b) aren't ASCII (ie. block HTML, RTF, etc)
> >
> > Anyone needing to distribute files can find some other legitimate way to
> do
> > it.
>
> Attachments are often the only way to distribute patches to the list
> that don't get munged by the archiving software, so that they remain
> available in the list archives. An occasional inappropriate post
> shouldn't be enough to change the way the list operates.
> Doug
There would be still another option: all current MTAs support interfacing
to virus checkers (my setup is Postfix/Amavisd/Sophie). Even though not
perfect (a virus would still pass until the virus signature is available)
it would probably help quite a lot. Most virii spread on mailing lists
are old enough :-)
I am however not sure about Ralf's setup. Virus scanners are payware
(and with respect to the fast update service required I do not expect
anything like this to be available for free) and somebody has to shell
out the money.
Best regards,
Lutz
--
Lutz Jaenicke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.aet.TU-Cottbus.DE/personen/jaenicke/
BTU Cottbus, Allgemeine Elektrotechnik
Universitaetsplatz 3-4, D-03044 Cottbus
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
