221–230 of 247 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Open source ≠ source available https://opensource.com/resources/what-open-source
You should've said that you want libre software instead. A custom license doesn't really make an open-source project just source-available, you're granted plenty of rights as an user to use that source. Source-available would be much more restrictive than this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hosted my own mail for some time and got into trouble with the school of my kids because they did not receive my reply to their mail. I self hosted because I wanted to prefer not to be part of the huge o365/Gmail/iCloud monocultures. Last year I moved my mail to an old fashioned shared webhosting account at Hetzner. Very happy with it!
> Last year I moved my mail to an old fashioned shared webhosting account at Hetzner. Very happy with it! How exactly is that solving the problem? If anyone does something remotely spammy from that ip, your mails are spam again too. And you probably got lucky that the ip you're sitting on was warm and trusted to begin with. You didn't really find a solution, the problem simply hasn't occurred yet for you or you are n…
Many small busineses have their 'online' presence like that. If I have mail deliverability issues, it's not my problem any more, I can call Hetzner. And before I started using it I was sceptical because if Hetzner did not fix the reputibility of their IPs or the spam from their other customers, it would be a problem for me. But so far, it worked quite well!
Offtopic, but have people had any success maintaining a personal email domain as forwarding to the major email providers? I have a vanity domain, and used to be able to use GMail to send email as that domain [1], and forward received mail from that domain back to GMail. But with SPF, DKIM, and DMARC (or something), this has broken and such received email gets marked as spam and/or phishing. I don't know how to fix th…
But I'm not really satisfied with the sending side of things - my plan doesn't include the feature, and sending via Gmail is enough most of the time, but setting up each alias manually in Gmail is quite annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should've said that you want libre software instead. A custom license doesn't really make an open-source project just source-available, you're granted plenty of rights as an user to use that source. Source-available would be much more restrictive than this.
Anything not adhering to the OSI definition of open source isn't open source, that's an official US court ruling. https://lwn.net/Articles/888291/
In addition to the fairly generous interpretation of that case. You make the assumption people should even recognize OSI definition or the US courts. The OSI definition is very narrow, someone forbidding military use doesn't make open-source software just source-available. Say what you want, one group doesn't get to decide a term, especially not that black and white.
Significantly more precise from you would be to say OSI open-source or libre software if you want that. Open-source as a generic term is much more liberal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't 465 safer since 587 uses STARTTLS and STARTTLS can be downgraded?
> since 587 uses STARTTLS and STARTTLS Technically yes, but for the last decade I've seen only one instance where 587 was explicitly STARTTLS (Fastmail), everyone else just running TLS on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything not adhering to the OSI definition of open source isn't open source, that's an official US court ruling. https://lwn.net/Articles/888291/
Bold claims and assumptions. If you want OSI open-source then say so. In addition to the fairly generous interpretation of that case. You make the assumption people should even recognize OSI definition or the US courts. The OSI definition is very narrow, someone forbidding military use doesn't make open-source software just source-available. Say what you want, one group doesn't get to decide a term, especially not th…
This isn't a small change either, I don't plan on selling it, but calling it open source is a stretch.
Even MongoDB, which has arguably less strict restrictions, have given up on trying to label the SSPL as open source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use http basic auth in front of every https internet exposed service. The services may have their own auth system on top of that, but htpasswd in front solves the vast majority of problems. Can’t exploit an SQL injection vulnerability if you can’t reach the endpoint in the first place. I’m less concerned about apache2 and nginx http basic auth vulnerabilities. They’ll get fixed much quicker than random webapps. Any…
why not vpn for the https services?
Some https services are internet exposed with http basic auth as a first line auth requirement. Some services are available to friends, or I want access to from devices I can’t VPN from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shocked that an article is required to explain what should be solved in the product.
It is solved by the product. You tick a box, and internal mail is bypassed. The issue here is that developers and IT folk seem to think that email is easy because the know IT. Email is a complex, and old protocol that has many nuances and, believe it or not, phishers are smart; end users are naive, and often reckless. Spammers, be they benign or otherwise, can be incredibly lazy too, but don't think for one second th…
Drives me nuts having to leave a UI to google (ironically) the issue to find a doc to enable a check box.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tldr; 465 is obsolete,you should not use it; 25 is for relaying mail between servers; 587 is the default mail submission port today.
No, it is not obsolete, quite contrary actually. See RFC8314. The implicit TLS submission port got deprecated for a brief time, but it's no longer deprecated. Explicit TLS is a terrible idea and for that reason it's recommended to provide implicit TLS (submissions).
Server operators should (and do) provide both 486 and 587 in order to maximize the amount of secure connections to their servers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tldr; 465 is obsolete,you should not use it; 25 is for relaying mail between servers; 587 is the default mail submission port today.
Is 465 really obsolete? https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8314#section-3.3