On Mon, 30 May 2005, Mark Nernberg wrote:
This, along with other similar such things, should be a total embarrassment
to the list administrators and operators.
I hear cmu is hiring if you'd like to fix it. Your email address suggests
you're local.
Considering that Project Cyrus aims to
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 16:01 -0400, Mark Nernberg wrote:
The problem is that this crap comes through the Cyrus lists all the time!
If it were once, I'd keep my mouth shut.
And, don't give me that TrendMicro/ClamAV crap -- quality attachment
filtering and simply disallowing attachments to
--On Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:47 AM +0200 Marco Colombo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Server-side global content-based filtering is silly, unless of course
it's your (private) server. Users are expected to do their own
filtering, otherwise they're exposed anyway. Server-side filtering (on
public
On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 09:59 -0400, Joseph Brennan wrote:
--On Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:47 AM +0200 Marco Colombo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Server-side global content-based filtering is silly, unless of course
it's your (private) server. Users are expected to do their own
filtering,
This, along with other similar such things, should be a total embarrassment
to the list administrators and operators.
I am a member of about 40 different mailing lists dealing with different
open-source software. Why is it that this is the only one which allows this
crap to make it through?
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 11:44:24AM -0400, Mark Nernberg wrote:
Considering that Project Cyrus aims to produce secure software, the total
lack of even basic anti-virus screening on the listserve (or, if there is
screening, the total failure of it), reeks of laziness on the part of the
system
The problem is that this crap comes through the Cyrus lists all the time!
If it were once, I'd keep my mouth shut.
And, don't give me that TrendMicro/ClamAV crap -- quality attachment
filtering and simply disallowing attachments to the list would nip
that in the bud.
On 5/30/05, Andreas S.
Well, I supose the list is not tightly controlled. But is unfair to
equate openness to insecurity. Imap-Sasl it is not a MTA and does not
relay anything. It would be nice to protect windows users a little more
but this implies more hardware resources. I think that attachment
prohibitioin is
