Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3166 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [SLE] [OT] pgp/gpg signatures & security (was 8.2 Announced)
- From: "Theo v. Werkhoven" <twe-suse.e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 01:32:29 +0100
- Message-id: <20030323003229.GB20081@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, rex just had to get this off his chest:
> Theo v. Werkhoven <twe-suse.e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2003-03-22 14:58]:
> > It is strange, yes. Today I asked some people on IRC to check my GPG
> > sig. One person had no problem verifiying the sig (ihe is using Mutt 1.4i and GPG
> > 1.2.1), the other person said my sig wasn't valid according to his
> > setup (he is using Mutt 1.3.27 and GPG 1.0.6).
>
> Any ideas on what the problem is? I've looked at the raw (well, not quite,
> because all messages go through procmail) message in /var/mail/rex with the
> same result.
Not a clue. Maybe a MUA's problem dealing with MIME, or quoted
printable messages? The FAQ on gnupg.org only mentions
incompatibilities between old versions of GPG and PGP.
>
> >> but your ISP is blocking mail from dialup IP ranges:
> >
> > They're not, I am.
>
> Good, you have a choice.
>
> > I'm sorry you're on the "wrong" end of the stick, but it is your
> > choice to use a mail-setup that is a known source of spam. Please
> > read the rest of the advice:
>
> [advice that was previously read snipped]
>
> You're obviously a knowledgeable user and I don't expect that anything I can
> say will alter your position. Nevertheless, for others who may be reading
> the thread: your argument is similar to a shopkeeper barring blacks from his
> shop because blacks indisputably (in the USA, at least) commit crimes at a
> higher rate than other racial groups, never mind that in spite of the higher
> rate, the percentage of blacks who are criminals is small. IOW, your policy
Wrong analogy. The dynablock doesn't discriminate between ISP's,
countries, etnics groups etc., it just says that dialup users should
use another way to deliver the mail then directly.
> of blocking dialup IPs punishes a largely innocent group for the infractions
> of a few. It also hurts you because people you may want to get mail from
> cannot get through (yes, I know how to use my ISP as a smart host, but my
> choice is to run my own mail server (sendmail) and bypass my ISP. Those who
> have been following the evisceration of the Bill of Rights in the USA may
> understand why.)
This dynablock rule is hardly ever triggered by mail I receive, and
in fact yours was the very first "false-positive". I seriously doubt
that there are many people who wish (let alone known how) to run
their own MTA on a dail-up line.
I'll consider disabling the rule, to see if many more spam appear in
my Junkmail box after SA dealt with it.
As for your political situation.. You get to vote again in a couple of
years right?
Theo
--
Theo v. Werkhoven Registered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org
ICBM 52 13 27N , 4 29 45E.
SuSE 8.0 x86
Kernel k_Athlon 2.4.19-4GB
See headers for PGP/GPG info.
> Theo v. Werkhoven <twe-suse.e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2003-03-22 14:58]:
> > It is strange, yes. Today I asked some people on IRC to check my GPG
> > sig. One person had no problem verifiying the sig (ihe is using Mutt 1.4i and GPG
> > 1.2.1), the other person said my sig wasn't valid according to his
> > setup (he is using Mutt 1.3.27 and GPG 1.0.6).
>
> Any ideas on what the problem is? I've looked at the raw (well, not quite,
> because all messages go through procmail) message in /var/mail/rex with the
> same result.
Not a clue. Maybe a MUA's problem dealing with MIME, or quoted
printable messages? The FAQ on gnupg.org only mentions
incompatibilities between old versions of GPG and PGP.
>
> >> but your ISP is blocking mail from dialup IP ranges:
> >
> > They're not, I am.
>
> Good, you have a choice.
>
> > I'm sorry you're on the "wrong" end of the stick, but it is your
> > choice to use a mail-setup that is a known source of spam. Please
> > read the rest of the advice:
>
> [advice that was previously read snipped]
>
> You're obviously a knowledgeable user and I don't expect that anything I can
> say will alter your position. Nevertheless, for others who may be reading
> the thread: your argument is similar to a shopkeeper barring blacks from his
> shop because blacks indisputably (in the USA, at least) commit crimes at a
> higher rate than other racial groups, never mind that in spite of the higher
> rate, the percentage of blacks who are criminals is small. IOW, your policy
Wrong analogy. The dynablock doesn't discriminate between ISP's,
countries, etnics groups etc., it just says that dialup users should
use another way to deliver the mail then directly.
> of blocking dialup IPs punishes a largely innocent group for the infractions
> of a few. It also hurts you because people you may want to get mail from
> cannot get through (yes, I know how to use my ISP as a smart host, but my
> choice is to run my own mail server (sendmail) and bypass my ISP. Those who
> have been following the evisceration of the Bill of Rights in the USA may
> understand why.)
This dynablock rule is hardly ever triggered by mail I receive, and
in fact yours was the very first "false-positive". I seriously doubt
that there are many people who wish (let alone known how) to run
their own MTA on a dail-up line.
I'll consider disabling the rule, to see if many more spam appear in
my Junkmail box after SA dealt with it.
As for your political situation.. You get to vote again in a couple of
years right?
Theo
--
Theo v. Werkhoven Registered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org
ICBM 52 13 27N , 4 29 45E.
SuSE 8.0 x86
Kernel k_Athlon 2.4.19-4GB
See headers for PGP/GPG info.
| < Previous | Next > |