On Sat, Nov 20, 2004, PowerMail discussions wrote:
Robert Snyder wrote:
If PowerMail supported CRAM-MD5 and/or Kerberos, it would be an
acceptable mail client.
PowerMail automatically use CRAM-MD5, if the server supports it, for SMTP
authentication. It uses plain text authentication only if
Dr Dave wrote on Sat 20 Nov 2004 at 12:22 -0800
it might let
any crook gain access to all of your communications, and even impersonate
you. Like say to get your banking passwords.
Jings, that explains all that phishing that goes on then...
I don't think.
--
David Gordon
Sure, unencrypted email is insecure.
But is it reasonable to have to send an unprotected email password to get
to the secure level?
That's not just about the content of your outgoing emails, it might let
any crook gain access to all of your communications, and even impersonate
you. Like say to
Robert Snyder wrote on Sat 20 Nov 2004 at 11:58 -0500
Please Make PowerMail a good security player before I am forced to move
on to another, more secure mail client!
I thought it was a Well Know Fact that email is insecure and you should
never write anything in an email which you wouldn't
Robert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on 20/11/04 4:58 pm
The Sys Admin side of me wants to ban the use of PowerMail (until it can
support either encrypted SMTP passwords or SSL SMTP using STARTTLS on
port 25).
Just as an aside, what would you use instead?
Cheers
--
Derry Thompson
g l o d e r w o
Robert Snyder said:
This means that I must allow my users to send their system passwords over
the network in the clear if they want to use PowerMail as their mail client.
Robert,
I was not aware of this as I haven't investigated PowerMail in that
department. However, I too would hesitate to
. It would also be my
preference, but I would happily take CRAM-MD5 support on the password.
Please Make PowerMail a good security player before I am forced to move
on to another, more secure mail client!
Sincerely,
Robert Snyder
PowerMail User and System Administrator
7 matches
Mail list logo
