At 02:19 PM 2003-02-10 -0500, Steve Werby wrote:
>"Vince Sabio" <vince@vjs.org> wrote:
> > However, default settings should be reasonable.
>
>Or force you to configure the software and provide adequate documentation.
>IIRC, 1.94.x hasn't been updated since 1997 or so. In 1997 the default for
>which_access was fairly reasonable. It's not really right to form an
>opinion based on what's reasonable today.
Part of the alert was against Mj2. Mj2 does not *force* you to configure
these items, but it does have strong suggestions that it is important to
look at a subset, and I believe that the which default is in the subset.
>Anyway, I just don't give any security alert creedence if it uses the phrase
>"evil spammers" not once, but twice. Redundant, don't you think?
It may well be, but sometimes I don't think it can be said often enough
:-). Especially after I spend the day looking at spam. I have an
individual system, I've tried to maintain a single e-mail address for a
number of years, and I am about to replace it with an autoresponder that
gives people who want to contact me my address-of-the-month.
--
SPAM: Trademark for spiced, chopped ham manufactured by Hormel.
spam: Unsolicited, Bulk E-mail, where e-mail can be interpreted generally
to mean electronic messages designed to be read by an individual, and it
can include Usenet, SMS, AIM, etc. But if it is not all three of
Unsolicited, Bulk, and E-mail, it simply is not spam. Misusing the term
plays into the hands of the spammers, since it causes confusion, and
spammers thrive on confusion. Spam is not speech, it is an action, like
theft, or vandalism. If you were not confused, would you patronize a spammer?
Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com - http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html
Stop by and light up the world!
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
