On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 4:24 PM loredana wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> I posted the following message to debian-accessibility and I post it
> again as suggested.
My mistake.
I can't cope with this threading hijacking. As I said in my first
post, I do have a serious problem I am trying to solve.
I
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 09:01:02PM +0100, Joe wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:19:58 +0200
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > So for Mr. Hardt, Kerberos doesn't exist. Or he's talking HTTP context
> > only.
> >
>
> MS has used Active Directory in some form or other since Win2000, and
> AD is basically
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:19:58 +0200
wrote:
>
> So for Mr. Hardt, Kerberos doesn't exist. Or he's talking HTTP context
> only.
>
MS has used Active Directory in some form or other since Win2000, and
AD is basically Kerberos plus LDAP. An AD 'domain' is basically a realm.
So yes, all their
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 14:20:29 -0400
Celejar wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 19:33:55 +0200
> Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
> > On Mon 19/Aug/2019 18:05:57 +0200 Celejar wrote:
> > > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:21:40 +0200
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:06:33AM -0400, Celejar
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 19:33:55 +0200
Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Mon 19/Aug/2019 18:05:57 +0200 Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:21:40 +0200
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:06:33AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>> I'd love to run my own mail stack, and I
On Mon 19/Aug/2019 18:05:57 +0200 Celejar wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:21:40 +0200
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:06:33AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> I'd love to run my own mail stack, and I think I could handle the
>>> software deployment reasonably well, but from
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:21:40 +0200
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:06:33AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I'd love to run my own mail stack, and I think I could handle the
> > software deployment reasonably well, but from everything I've read,
> > the headaches required to make sure
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:19:58 +0200
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 09:47:55AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:32:31 +0200
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:15:45PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 23:43:35 +0200
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 11:29:04AM -0400, Jude DaShiell wrote:
> Google could evaluate the non-browser software in use and pass what is
> secure and fail the other packages with explanations for the authors of
> failed packages [...]
I think it's more subtle than that. "Traditional" (i.e.
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:19:58
> From: to...@tuxteam.de
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: webmail and email from command line
>
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 09:47:55AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 19
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:06:33AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
[...]
> I'd love to run my own mail stack, and I think I could handle the
> software deployment reasonably well, but from everything I've read,
> the headaches required to make sure that major mail operators will
> actually accept my mail
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 09:47:55AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:32:31 +0200
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:15:45PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 23:43:35 +0200
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> >
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:33:52 +0200
Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Mon 19/Aug/2019 03:15:45 +0200 Celejar wrote:
> > I think terming Google's decision to call software that doesn't
> > implement OAuth "less secure" "evil" is hyperbole that doesn't help our
> > broader cause of opposing its
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:32:31 +0200
wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:15:45PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 23:43:35 +0200
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:10:35 +0200
>
> [...]
>
> > I think terming
On Mon 19/Aug/2019 03:15:45 +0200 Celejar wrote:
> I think terming Google's decision to call software that doesn't
> implement OAuth "less secure" "evil" is hyperbole that doesn't help our
> broader cause of opposing its breaking of standards, imposing various
> sorts of lock-in, invasions of
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:32:31 +0200
wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:15:45PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 23:43:35 +0200
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:10:35 +0200
>
> [...]
>
> > I think terming
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:15:45PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 23:43:35 +0200
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:10:35 +0200
[...]
> I think terming Google's decision to call software that doesn't
> implement
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 23:43:35 +0200
wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:10:35 +0200
> > wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > less secure apps" option, and then configure POP3 / SMTP normally.
> > >
> > >
> > > Google's evil
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:10:35 +0200
> wrote:
[...]
> > > less secure apps" option, and then configure POP3 / SMTP normally.
> >
> >
> > Google's evil comes through the backdoor, without making any noise,
> > like
On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:10:35 +0200
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:02:57PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:24:49 +
> > loredana wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > secure applications, this is likely not to be a viable solution (it
> > > seems that google is going to forbit
ri, 16 Aug 2019, loredana wrote:
> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:26:53
> From: loredana
> To: Jude DaShiell
> Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: webmail and email from command line
> Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 13:27:39 + (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@list
Hi Loredana,
I agree with other debianers that setting a forward to another email
provider for now should be the easiest option.
I think it would be a good idea to find an email provider that allows
smtp/imap clients, and as far as I know protonmail does it only in Pro
version. I know there is
On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:51 PM Jude DaShiell wrote:
> Running using 2fa may be possible with non-browser apps if your security
> records indicate you ran with what google considers an untrusted app and
> google has it listed. You can generate an app-specific password for the
> non-browser app
On Fri, 16 Aug 2019, loredana wrote:
> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:02:17
> From: loredana
> To: Celejar
> Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: webmail and email from command line
> Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 12:03:05 + (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists
First of all, I wish to thank all of you who shared their experience.
Be reassured I am taking any constructive suggestion into serious
account and exploring more.
Then:
On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 2:03 AM Celejar wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:24:49 +000
> loredana wrote:
> > secure
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:02:57PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:24:49 +
> loredana wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > secure applications, this is likely not to be a viable solution (it
> > seems that google is going to forbit less secure application access
> > starting November first
On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:24:49 +
loredana wrote:
...
> secure applications, this is likely not to be a viable solution (it
> seems that google is going to forbit less secure application access
> starting November first of this year and it is already a pain to use
> it now).
What is your
On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:23:23 +0200
to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
...
> Elsewhere, perhaps riseup [1] is an option. It's donation-funded,
> so consider throwing some small amount into their hat.
>
> Cheers
>
> [1] https://riseup.net/
I think you've mentioned them before, but how seriously should we
On Wed 14 Aug 2019 at 12:19:01 (-0600), Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> loredana writes:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:00 PM wrote:
> >
> >> [...]
> >
> >> Note that what Google calls there "less secure applications" is just
> >> marketing mumbo-jumbo to nudge users off their non-browser clients.
> >
>
to...@tuxteam.de writes:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 06:02:01PM +, loredana wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:00 PM wrote:
> >=20
> > > [...]
> >=20
> > > Note that what Google calls there "less secure applications" is just
> > > marketing mumbo-jumbo to nudge users off their non-browser
loredana writes:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:00 PM wrote:
>
>> [...]
>
>> Note that what Google calls there "less secure applications" is just
>> marketing mumbo-jumbo to nudge users off their non-browser clients.
>
> I know. But knowing it, and perhaps blaiming it, is not a solution.
>
>> Is
On 14/08/2019 19:02, loredana wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:00 PM wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> Note that what Google calls there "less secure applications" is just
>> marketing mumbo-jumbo to nudge users off their non-browser clients.
> I know. But knowing it, and perhaps blaiming it, is not a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
loredana wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:00 PM wrote:
>
>> [...]
>
>> Note that what Google calls there "less secure applications" is just
>> marketing mumbo-jumbo to nudge users off their non-browser clients.
>
> I know. But knowing it, and
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 06:02:01PM +, loredana wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:00 PM wrote:
>
> > [...]
>
> > Note that what Google calls there "less secure applications" is just
> > marketing mumbo-jumbo to nudge users off their non-browser clients.
>
> I know. But knowing it, and
On 8/14/2019 8:02 PM, loredana wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:00 PM wrote:
>
>> [...]
>
>> Note that what Google calls there "less secure applications" is just
>> marketing mumbo-jumbo to nudge users off their non-browser clients.
>
> I know. But knowing it, and perhaps blaiming it, is not a
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:00 PM wrote:
> [...]
> Note that what Google calls there "less secure applications" is just
> marketing mumbo-jumbo to nudge users off their non-browser clients.
I know. But knowing it, and perhaps blaiming it, is not a solution.
> Is changing mail provider an option
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 04:24:49PM +, loredana wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I posted the following message to debian-accessibility and I post it
> again suggested.
[...]
> 'Though I managed to send mail to my gmail account by allowing less
> secure applications, this is likely not to be a viable
37 matches
Mail list logo
