On 13 Feb 2009, at 04:23, Ian Batten wrote:
> Security isn't about protocols, it's about systems, and I suspect POP3
> vs IMAP is metonymic for local vs remote mail storage.
Also keep in mind that IMAP can be used just like POP, i.e., you can
use IMAP to download & remove all mail from the serve
David Lang wrote:
>
> the flip side of the complience issue is that it's a LOT easier to control
> retention policies (including backups) on a central server than on
> everybody's
> individual desktops/laptops.
>
> as for the concerns about laxer data security in other juristictions, that's
> s
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Ian Batten wrote:
> On 13 Feb 09, at 0149, Joseph Brennan wrote:
>>
>> The protocol itself is no less secure than POP.
>
> Security isn't about protocols, it's about systems, and I suspect POP3
> vs IMAP is metonymic for local vs remote mail storage.
>
> I can see an argument
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Alain Williams wrote:
> From: Alain Williams
> To: Cyrus Mailing List
> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:30:46 +
> Subject: Re: Security risk of POP3 & IMAP protocols
...
> > Yes. Anything that opens a bunch of mailboxes at the same time
> > might
--On 13 February 2009 15:30:46 + Alain Williams
wrote:
> [23~On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 03:21:06PM +, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>>
>>
>> --On 13 February 2009 14:35:43 + Alain Williams
>> wrote:
>>
>> > That got me thinking
>> > I rate limit ssh connections to try to prevent dictionary
Alain Williams wrote, at 02/13/2009 10:30 AM:
> [23~On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 03:21:06PM +, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>>
>> --On 13 February 2009 14:35:43 + Alain Williams
>> wrote:
>>
>>> That got me thinking
>>> I rate limit ssh connections to try to prevent dictionary attacks (3
>>> attemp
[23~On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 03:21:06PM +, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>
>
> --On 13 February 2009 14:35:43 + Alain Williams
> wrote:
>
> >That got me thinking
> >I rate limit ssh connections to try to prevent dictionary attacks (3
> >attempts/3 minutes/IP address). If I were to do the same
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Jason Voorhees wrote:
> Hi people:
>
> A friend of mine is asking me about security risks of using IMAP &
> POP3 protocols. Why? Because a sales person told my friend that IMAP
> protocol is less secure than POP3 protocol. This assumption is not
> related to Cyrus
--On 13 February 2009 14:35:43 + Alain Williams
wrote:
> That got me thinking
> I rate limit ssh connections to try to prevent dictionary attacks (3
> attempts/3 minutes/IP address). If I were to do the same with IMAP would
> that cause problems with some clients, ie are there some cl
Alain Williams wrote:
> That got me thinking
> I rate limit ssh connections to try to prevent dictionary attacks (3
> attempts/3 minutes/IP address).
> If I were to do the same with IMAP would that cause problems with some
> clients,
> ie are there some clients that to many connect/disconne
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 09:13:40AM -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 13:17 +, Duncan Gibb wrote:
> > Jason Voorhees wrote:
> > JV> a sales person told my friend that IMAP protocol is
> > JV> less secure than POP3 protocol.
> > Other people have covered the IMAP vs POP3 i
Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
JV> a sales person told my friend that IMAP protocol is
JV> less secure than POP3 protocol.
ATW> It is really far and away more about end-to-end security
ATW> practices than it is the OSI layer 7 protocol(s) involved.
Indeed.
ATW> I stand by my assertion that the IMAP
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 13:17 +, Duncan Gibb wrote:
> Jason Voorhees wrote:
> JV> a sales person told my friend that IMAP protocol is
> JV> less secure than POP3 protocol.
> Other people have covered the IMAP vs POP3 issues - Ian Batten most
> comprehensively - but one comment I would add is that
Jason Voorhees wrote:
JV> a sales person told my friend that IMAP protocol is
JV> less secure than POP3 protocol.
Other people have covered the IMAP vs POP3 issues - Ian Batten most
comprehensively - but one comment I would add is that if you make either
service available to the open internet, ev
On 13 Feb 09, at 0149, Joseph Brennan wrote:
>
> The protocol itself is no less secure than POP.
Security isn't about protocols, it's about systems, and I suspect POP3
vs IMAP is metonymic for local vs remote mail storage.
I can see an argument that says that one problem with IMAP is that
yo
Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>> A friend of mine is asking me about security risks of using IMAP &
>> POP3 protocols. Why? Because a sales person told my friend that IMAP
>> protocol is less secure than POP3 protocol.
This reminds me of a concern that was raised about U Wash IMAP and storage
of
> A friend of mine is asking me about security risks of using IMAP &
> POP3 protocols. Why? Because a sales person told my friend that IMAP
> protocol is less secure than POP3 protocol. This assumption is not
> related to Cyrus IMAP, instead is related only to the protocols.
> I'm searching at Goog
On Feb 12, 2009, at 2:49 PM, Jason Voorhees wrote:
Hi people:
A friend of mine is asking me about security risks of using IMAP &
POP3 protocols. Why? Because a sales person told my friend that IMAP
protocol is less secure than POP3 protocol. This assumption is not
related to Cyrus IMAP, instea
Hi people:
A friend of mine is asking me about security risks of using IMAP &
POP3 protocols. Why? Because a sales person told my friend that IMAP
protocol is less secure than POP3 protocol. This assumption is not
related to Cyrus IMAP, instead is related only to the protocols.
I'm searching at Go
19 matches
Mail list logo
