161–170 of 301 posts
As an aside, I believe "foobar" is a sanitization of "fubar", which is an unofficial military acronym for "f*ucked up beyond all recognition". If you're interested in the history of fubar, a search of "history fubar" provides more history about "fubar", "snafu", and other colorful unofficial military acronyms.
Something that I’m surprised a lot of devs don’t know; there are official domains you’re supposed to use for documentation, testing, etc. They are specifically reserved by IANA for these purposes. Originally I think it was just example.com, but they now have a list of all them: https://www.iana.org/domains/reserved
Indeed. I've owned `invaliddomain.com` for almost 20 years. You'll be surprised how many use it for testing. One morning I woke up to 30,000 e-mails from Sony Japan with PDFs attached of scanned hand-written part orders. Something similar with Boeing sending me backup notifications. I notified each of these companies about their configuration through their official channels, only to be told "no, it's your server doin…
This domain would be the perfect basis for such a business.
This makes me realize that DNS is slightly flawed in that you can prove "the owner of example.com wants to accept email at X.Y.Z.A" but not "the owner of X.Y.Z.A wants to accept email for example.com". (My experience using a managed load balancer on Amazon was that I got a ton of traffic for websites that weren't mine. Some DNS record must have been out there pointing towards our IP, which I guess is bound to happen when you only have 2^32 of them to share among all of humanity. Someone should do something about that...)
What I’m curious to learn is which mail server he uses to handle the influx of emails to foo@bar.com…
Looks like at the moment he simply lets them drop: $ dig -t MX bar.com +short $
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321#section-5.1
> If an empty list of MXs is returned, the address is treated as if it was associated with an implicit MX RR, with a preference of 0, pointing to that host.
That said, it doesn't look like there's an SMTP server running for bar.com.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the real answer here. It's widely believed that domains working the opposite way of filesystem hierarchies and even URL paths was a huge design mistake. Think of how many billions of dollars have been lost over the years from account compromises resulting from people not correctly distinguishing yourbank.com/account/foobar from yourbank.com-account.info/foobar.
1. The reason for the change is generally thought to be email: you read least specific to most specific from left to right, like non-American dates, e.g firstname.lastname@group.department.university.edu 2. also I think ! was used rather than . for some networks at some times. Certainly I’ve heard this anecdote from some early users of the internet (or maybe other computer networks) 3. Traditionally the dot is the ze…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UUCP#Bang_path
! was used for manual routing from the source to the destination, when messages were copied from server to server via UUCP. People would write paths like ...!ucbvax!deptserver!myname , which means "you probably know how to get messages to ucbvax; from there, here's how to reach me".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do we know you are the right horse? Sorry, just watched `/the social dilemma` and now I am skeptical of all information on the internet.
If you give me your email I can send you a message from my _lastname_@ work address, which you can then match up with published media I've done under my name, e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBkX30Cj7Bw and https://security.googleblog.com/2017/09/broadening-hsts-to-s... Or you can look at the matching username on GitHub ( https://github.com/CydeWeys ) and see that I'm a member of the Google org and owner of the…
Not disputing your account in any way, but please don't propagate the widespread myth that only people who own an email address can send from that email address. If you wanted to use your well-known email address as authentication, you'd need to offer to reply to a mail sent to that address.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was once reading some documentation (I think for GCP) and there was a weird artifact in the corner of the page, it moved a bit when I moused over it (??) and when I clicked it I got redirected to this site (using the .withgoogle.com TLD). The element never reappeared again. I always wondered why the element appeared on the page. Obviously because "some combination of factors" ultimately returned true - I mean speci…
I got something like that once but my ad blocker apparently screwed up the functionality and I never saw one again.
I really like the idea of setting your MX record to 127.0.0.1. I am not sure what problems this causes (the author mentions people are angry about it) but I like it. This makes me realize that DNS is slightly flawed in that you can prove "the owner of example.com wants to accept email at X.Y.Z.A" but not "the owner of X.Y.Z.A wants to accept email for example.com". (My experience using a managed load balancer on Amaz…
I imagine it could cause annoying loops with some mail server configurations.
RFC 7505[1] defines null MX records. This might be a good alternative, depending on what your intention is.
The emails I would get...
Let’s just say I turned off wildcard receipt of email after a week to limit my liability.