Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.os.linux.slackware > #26533 > unrolled thread

Product LockIn

Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux.slackware

Contents

  Product LockIn no.top.post@gmail.com - 2016-03-25 12:54 +0000
    Re: Product LockIn Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-03-25 14:10 +0000
    Re: Product LockIn Rick Pikul/Chakat Firepaw <chakatfirepaw@gmail.com> - 2016-03-25 22:52 +0000
      Re: Product LockIn Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-26 12:53 +0000
        Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 13:07 +0000
        Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-26 15:18 +0100
          Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 15:04 +0000
            Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-26 21:25 +0100
              Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-27 12:05 +0100
                Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-27 15:57 +0200
                  Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-29 12:26 +0200
                Re: Product LockIn Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-03-27 14:45 +0000
                  Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-27 16:25 +0100
                    Re: Product LockIn Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-03-27 16:05 +0000
                      Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-29 04:35 +0200
                      Re: Product LockIn Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 01:59 +0000
                        Re: Product LockIn Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2016-03-30 21:15 -0700
                          Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 11:05 +0100
                            Re: Product LockIn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-31 13:11 +0100
                              Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 15:35 +0100
                                Re: Product LockIn Charlie <cdknospam@msn.com> - 2016-03-31 12:10 -0400
                                  Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 22:36 +0100
                            Re: Product LockIn rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 16:00 -0400
                              Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 22:35 +0100
                                Re: Product LockIn rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 18:11 -0400
                                  Re: Product LockIn Graham. <alt.f7-fsks89j@yopmail.com> - 2016-04-04 22:26 +0100
                            Re: Product LockIn Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2016-03-31 21:45 -0700
                          Re: Product LockIn Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-03-31 06:14 -0500
                          Re: Product LockIn Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2016-03-31 13:24 +0000
                            Re: Product LockIn noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> - 2016-04-01 13:19 +1000
                            Re: Product LockIn Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2016-03-31 21:52 -0700
                        Re: Product LockIn Chick Tower <c.tower@deadspam.com> - 2016-03-31 16:36 +0000
                          Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-04-01 03:45 +0200
                    Re: Product LockIn Mark Carroll <mtbc@ixod.org> - 2016-03-27 18:14 +0100
                    Re: Product LockIn Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-03-27 20:52 +0100
                      Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 01:12 +0100
                        Re: Product LockIn Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-28 04:04 -0300
                        Re: Product LockIn Mark Carroll <mtbc@ixod.org> - 2016-03-28 08:32 +0100
                        Re: Product LockIn Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-03-28 11:47 +0100
                        Re: Product LockIn Aaron Baugher <aaron@baugher.biz> - 2016-03-28 07:07 -0500
                    Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-29 04:32 +0200
          Re: Product LockIn no.top.post@gmail.com - 2016-03-28 02:55 +0000
            Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-29 04:44 +0200
        Re: Product LockIn Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-03-26 19:05 +0000
        Re: Product LockIn Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-26 16:37 -0300
    Re: Product LockIn sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2016-03-30 14:37 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#26533 — Product LockIn

Companies like to call it "brand loyalty".
I call it "product lock-in".
Like when you were addicted to Lucky-Strike for 50 years.

Since when the local ISP fell-out because it [or perhaps I] couldn't
connect via the new wireless-phone, I was forced to use gmail.

This web-based clown system wants to go on-line, and won't accept
further editing, so you lose your previous work, when you <Enter>
the "Subject" field. Apparently the user should just mouse [or perhaps
Tab] when the Subject field is done?
 
One reason why zillions of victims rely on gmail, is that they are
prepared to retrain themselves to its quirks.

That's how these waves of fads sweep through societies.

How do people tolerate the continual pressure to "update" their
product, when the products from the 90's didn't have these problems?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#26534

On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 12:54:45 +0000, no.top.post wrote:
> I was forced to use gmail.
> 
> This web-based clown system

You should be able to use any email provider you prefer and you should be 
able to use any mail client you prefer.

Even if you choose to use gmail you could configure any email client of 
your choice to connect to your gmail account using imap.

The good thing with email is not that you have good email providers or 
good email tools. The good thing with email is that it confirms to good 
standards well documented in RFCs. Exemples of such standards are 
(E)SMTP, POP and IMAP. Using these standards you are able to combine your 
favorite email provider(s) with your favorite email tool(s).

Gmail is just another email account provider with its pros and cons and 
like most other email account providers you are free to choose among 
different email clients or web interfaces.

regards Henrik
-- 
The address in the header is only to prevent spam. My real address is:
hc351(at)poolhem.se Examples of addresses which go to spammers:
root@localhost postmaster@localhost

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26535

On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 12:54:45 +0000, no.top.post wrote:

> This web-based clown system wants to go on-line, and won't accept
> further editing, so you lose your previous work, when you <Enter>
> the "Subject" field. Apparently the user should just mouse [or perhaps
> Tab] when the Subject field is done?

I'll let you in on a little secret:  Gmail supports IMAP, you can use 
just about any mail client you want.  There is nothing forcing you to use 
the web interface.

-- 
Chakat Firepaw - Inventor and Scientist (mad)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26536

On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 22:52:01 +0000, Rick Pikul/Chakat Firepaw wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 12:54:45 +0000, no.top.post wrote:
> 
>> This web-based clown system wants to go on-line, and won't accept
>> further editing, so you lose your previous work, when you <Enter> the
>> "Subject" field. Apparently the user should just mouse [or perhaps Tab]
>> when the Subject field is done?
> 
> I'll let you in on a little secret:  Gmail supports IMAP, you can use
> just about any mail client you want.  There is nothing forcing you to
> use the web interface.

Yes, I've read that often; and pop too.
IIRC I tried mutt with IMAP once and rejected it, because it assumed
an always on-line connection. I need to send and fetch in a one-shot
60 seconds connection.

Now I tried thunderbird [another cartoon-based system].
Google shows plenty of discussions about the error-that-it-gives me too.
It's as if thunderbird must use a different password to web-based, which
would be absurd.

What really pisses me off, is these continual <Life is better with Coke>
like messages of <you should "update" your browser>.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26537

On 26/03/16 12:53, Unknown wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 22:52:01 +0000, Rick Pikul/Chakat Firepaw wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 12:54:45 +0000, no.top.post wrote:
>>
>>> This web-based clown system wants to go on-line, and won't accept
>>> further editing, so you lose your previous work, when you <Enter> the
>>> "Subject" field. Apparently the user should just mouse [or perhaps Tab]
>>> when the Subject field is done?
>>
>> I'll let you in on a little secret:  Gmail supports IMAP, you can use
>> just about any mail client you want.  There is nothing forcing you to
>> use the web interface.
>
> Yes, I've read that often; and pop too.
> IIRC I tried mutt with IMAP once and rejected it, because it assumed
> an always on-line connection. I need to send and fetch in a one-shot
> 60 seconds connection.
>
> Now I tried thunderbird [another cartoon-based system].
> Google shows plenty of discussions about the error-that-it-gives me too.
> It's as if thunderbird must use a different password to web-based, which
> would be absurd.
>
> What really pisses me off, is these continual <Life is better with Coke>
> like messages of <you should "update" your browser>.
>
Use POP if you want to permanently remove mails from the server

http://www.hesk.com/knowledgebase/?article=72

gives the target, port and protocols

You need to enable POP forwarding on gmail tho


Thudderbored is OK at all this.




-- 
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that 
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is 
fully understood.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26538

On 2016-03-26 13:53, Unknown wrote:

> Yes, I've read that often; and pop too.
> IIRC I tried mutt with IMAP once and rejected it, because it assumed
> an always on-line connection. I need to send and fetch in a one-shot
> 60 seconds connection.

Then use fetchmail or similar.

> Now I tried thunderbird [another cartoon-based system].
> Google shows plenty of discussions about the error-that-it-gives me too.
> It's as if thunderbird must use a different password to web-based, which
> would be absurd.

Thunderbird works fine with gmail (same password), either for imap or
for pop. You need javascript enabled the first time, or to tell gmail
that you are going to use a standard client (it will warn you that it is
less secure).

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26539

On 26/03/16 14:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2016-03-26 13:53, Unknown wrote:
>
>> Yes, I've read that often; and pop too.
>> IIRC I tried mutt with IMAP once and rejected it, because it assumed
>> an always on-line connection. I need to send and fetch in a one-shot
>> 60 seconds connection.
>
> Then use fetchmail or similar.

Indeed.

If that's what you have, the stock way is to run some kind of MTA on a 
linux machine and have a script that handles connection, flushes the 
send queues (sendmail -q, or equivalent)  to the 'smart host' and 
fetches the POP mail from somewhere (fetchmail).

Since UUCP is out of fashion these days ;-)

Then your won machine locally is the 'mail server' and can have any 
client pointed at it on the same machine.




-- 
Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time the quo has lost 
its status.

Laurence Peter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26543

On 2016-03-26 16:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 26/03/16 14:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> Then use fetchmail or similar.
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> If that's what you have, the stock way is to run some kind of MTA on a
> linux machine and have a script that handles connection, flushes the
> send queues (sendmail -q, or equivalent)  to the 'smart host' and
> fetches the POP mail from somewhere (fetchmail).

fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of duplicates.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26547

On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2016-03-26 16:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 26/03/16 14:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>>> Then use fetchmail or similar.
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> If that's what you have, the stock way is to run some kind of MTA on a
>> linux machine and have a script that handles connection, flushes the
>> send queues (sendmail -q, or equivalent)  to the 'smart host' and
>> fetches the POP mail from somewhere (fetchmail).
>
> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of duplicates.
>
BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.


-- 
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that 
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is 
fully understood.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26548

On 2016-03-27 13:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:


>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of
>> duplicates.
>>
> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.

No.

Only if that server is GMAIL, because it is their stated goal to archive
all your mail. The space they give you is huge, so there is no need to
delete anything, they say.

However, this is configurable. I don't do that, but I believe there is
an option in the web configuration. Others that do may explain the details.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26565

On 2016-03-27 15:57, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2016-03-27 13:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
> 
>>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of
>>> duplicates.
>>>
>> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.
> 
> No.
> 
> Only if that server is GMAIL, because it is their stated goal to archive
> all your mail. The space they give you is huge, so there is no need to
> delete anything, they say.
> 
> However, this is configurable. I don't do that, but I believe there is
> an option in the web configuration. Others that do may explain the details.

From the fetchmail FAQ:

<http://www.fetchmail.info/fetchmail-FAQ.html#I9>

And from a recent post in the fetchmail mail list:

POP Download:
1. Enable POP for *all* mail
2. When messages are accessed with POP: [keep Gmail's copy in the Inbox]

IMAP Access:
* Status: Enable IMAP
* When I mark a message in IMAP as deleted: (*) Auto-Expunge off - Wait
for the client to update the server
* When a message is marked as deleted and expunged from the last visible
IMAP folder: (*) Immediately delete the message forever
* Folder Size Limits: (*) Do not limit...


<https://sourceforge.net/p/fetchmail/mailman/message/34668658/>


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26549

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:05:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2016-03-26 16:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 26/03/16 14:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>>> Then use fetchmail or similar.
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>>
>>> If that's what you have, the stock way is to run some kind of MTA on a
>>> linux machine and have a script that handles connection, flushes the
>>> send queues (sendmail -q, or equivalent)  to the 'smart host' and
>>> fetches the POP mail from somewhere (fetchmail).
>>
>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of duplicates.
>>
> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.

I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
the fetchmail config file.

Originally I had fetchmail setup to pull the mail and delete it from
the server. I have dovecot running so thunderbird would have no problems 
connecting to my MTA mailbox for reading/replying in the imap mode.

Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my MTA
is not in a registered domain or some such thing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26550

On 27/03/16 15:45, Bit Twister wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:05:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2016-03-26 16:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 26/03/16 14:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Then use fetchmail or similar.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed.
>>>>
>>>> If that's what you have, the stock way is to run some kind of MTA on a
>>>> linux machine and have a script that handles connection, flushes the
>>>> send queues (sendmail -q, or equivalent)  to the 'smart host' and
>>>> fetches the POP mail from somewhere (fetchmail).
>>>
>>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of duplicates.
>>>
>> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.
>
> I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
> option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
> the fetchmail config file.
>

Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch to 
a single online server space.

"IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of an 
email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally leave 
messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"


POP is a 'store till I download' protocol. Imap is not.


> Originally I had fetchmail setup to pull the mail and delete it from
> the server. I have dovecot running so thunderbird would have no problems
> connecting to my MTA mailbox for reading/replying in the imap mode.
>
> Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
> mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my MTA
> is not in a registered domain or some such thing.
>

MMm. you need a smart host then.

Oddly enough, getting a virtual private server for a fistful of dollars, 
and a small fist at that - is no big deal and is probably te easiest way 
to have your own domain and email setup entirely under your control, 
independent from any ISP,  and accessible how you want and where you want.


-- 
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 
twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a 
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, 
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer 
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to 
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26551

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 27/03/16 15:45, Bit Twister wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:05:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:

>>>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of duplicates.
>>>>
>>> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.
>>
>> I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
>> option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
>> the fetchmail config file.
>>
>
> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch to 
> a single online server space.

>
> "IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of an 
> email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally leave 
> messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"


What can I say. Pretty sure my original .fetchmailrc had nokeep which
removed the email from gmail.com after download, and I configured
thunderbird to use localhost. Now that my send emails fail I changed
.fetchmailrc to keep, which leaves the email at gmail.com and
thunderbird for gmail.com. Example: 

# cat ~/.fetchmailrc
poll "imap.gmail.com" with proto IMAP 
 user "justme@gmail.com" there with password "a secret"
 is justme here
 options ssl sslcertck fetchall stripcr keep


>> Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
>> mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my MTA
>> is not in a registered domain or some such thing.
>>
>
> MMm. you need a smart host then.

I do not know what that means. All I know was mail used to go through using
postfix generic with
    bittwister@wb.home.test justme@gmail.com
    bittwister@localhost.home.test  justme@gmail.com
and all reply emails would go back to gmail.com as desired.
Now the messages are rejected.


> Oddly enough, getting a virtual private server for a fistful of dollars, 
> and a small fist at that - is no big deal and is probably te easiest way 
> to have your own domain and email setup entirely under your control, 
> independent from any ISP,  and accessible how you want and where you want.

Yeah, forgot about that. I had looked into it until I got postfix generic 
working and forgot about using a domain of my own. I toggle ISP whenever 
I can save money, so I had already moved all my email addresses to
free mail servers. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26563

On 2016-03-27 18:05, Bit Twister wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


>> MMm. you need a smart host then.
> 
> I do not know what that means. All I know was mail used to go through using
> postfix generic with
>     bittwister@wb.home.test justme@gmail.com
>     bittwister@localhost.home.test  justme@gmail.com
> and all reply emails would go back to gmail.com as desired.
> Now the messages are rejected.

If you want to send email with postfix via your gmail account, ask. It
can be an "smart host" or not. Basically you have to teach postfix to
authenticate to gmail with the appropriate login/password data.

-- 
Cheers,
       Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26570

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:05:55 +0000, Bit Twister wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 27/03/16 15:45, Bit Twister wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:05:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
---snip--
>>>
>>> I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
>>> option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
>>> the fetchmail config file.
>>>
>>>
>> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch to
>> a single online server space.
> 
> 
>> "IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of
>> an email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally
>> leave messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"
> 
> 
> What can I say. Pretty sure my original .fetchmailrc had nokeep which
> removed the email from gmail.com after download, and I configured
> thunderbird to use localhost. Now that my send emails fail I changed
> .fetchmailrc to keep, which leaves the email at gmail.com and
> thunderbird for gmail.com. Example:
> 
> # cat ~/.fetchmailrc
> poll "imap.gmail.com" with proto IMAP
>  user "justme@gmail.com" there with password "a secret" is justme here
>  options ssl sslcertck fetchall stripcr keep
> 
> 
>>> Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
>>> mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my
>>> MTA is not in a registered domain or some such thing.
>>>
>>>
>> MMm. you need a smart host then.
> 
> I do not know what that means. All I know was mail used to go through
> using postfix generic with
>     bittwister@wb.home.test justme@gmail.com
>     bittwister@localhost.home.test  justme@gmail.com
> and all reply emails would go back to gmail.com as desired. Now the
> messages are rejected.
> 
> 
>> Oddly enough, getting a virtual private server for a fistful of
>> dollars, and a small fist at that - is no big deal and is probably te
>> easiest way to have your own domain and email setup entirely under your
>> control, independent from any ISP,  and accessible how you want and
>> where you want.
> 
> Yeah, forgot about that. I had looked into it until I got postfix
> generic working and forgot about using a domain of my own. I toggle ISP
> whenever I can save money, so I had already moved all my email addresses
> to free mail servers.

The above complex elaborate description shows how the big
US corparations are entrapping us to become another generation of
<lucky strike addicts>. 

In the 90s you could have the EmailTextFrames lying on your
screen: received, written and ready to send, directory of in box ....;
and with just-2-klux-each could eg. send-that-one, fetch-that-one .....

Now with the US commercial giants vying to capture as many as possible 
locked-in victims, you face the following:-----
Hi **,
  Someone just tried to sign in to your Google Account **** from an app 
 that doesn't meet modern security standards.
Details:
Monday, March 28, 2016 2:58 AM (GMT)
  We strongly recommend that you use a secure app, like Gmail, to access 
 your account. All apps made by Google meet these security standards. 
 Using a less secure app, on the other hand, could leave your account 
 vulnerable. Learn more.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26571

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.slackware.]
On 2016-03-31, Unknown <dog@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The above complex elaborate description shows how the big
> US corparations are entrapping us to become another generation of
><lucky strike addicts>. 

If you don't like gmail then don't use it.  Run your own SMTP server,
and try to fix it after you get pwn3d an hour later.

--keith

-- 
kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26572

On 31/03/16 05:15, Keith Keller wrote:
> ["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.slackware.]
> On 2016-03-31, Unknown <dog@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The above complex elaborate description shows how the big
>> US corparations are entrapping us to become another generation of
>> <lucky strike addicts>.
>
> If you don't like gmail then don't use it.  Run your own SMTP server,

I do

> and try to fix it after you get pwn3d an hour later.

I haven't been in 5 years...

OTOH I do hold my hand up to that being my business before I retired...

If anyone is interested in HOW to build a basic smtp/popmail type setup 
oin a virtual private server, I could probably detail the steps.



>
> --keith
>


-- 
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is 
true: it is true because it is powerful."

Lucas Bergkamp

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26574

On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:05:27 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 31/03/16 05:15, Keith Keller wrote:
> > ["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.slackware.]
> > On 2016-03-31, Unknown <dog@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The above complex elaborate description shows how the big
> >> US corparations are entrapping us to become another generation of
> >> <lucky strike addicts>.
> >
> > If you don't like gmail then don't use it.  Run your own SMTP server,
> 
> I do

	That makes at least two of us.

> > and try to fix it after you get pwn3d an hour later.
> 
> I haven't been in 5 years...

	Considerably longer than that here.

> OTOH I do hold my hand up to that being my business before I retired...

	A basic incoming SMTP with spam filtering, POP3 and IMAP access is
pretty straightforward to set up these days. I limit the POP3 and IMAP
access to my LAN and use VPN whenever I'm away. I like the extra layer of
security this provides - nobody gets to attack my POP3 and IMAP interfaces,
only the incoming SMTP.

	I do find it pays to keep life simple and have separate incoming
and outgoing relays to the LAN. One only accepts SMTP connections from
inside, the other only from outside. The latter is blocked from making
outgoing connections. Simple and effective backstop to the relaying
controls.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26576

On 31/03/16 13:11, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> I do find it pays to keep life simple and have separate incoming
> and outgoing relays to the LAN. One only accepts SMTP connections from
> inside, the other only from outside. The latter is blocked from making
> outgoing connections. Simple and effective backstop to the relaying
> controls.

I just ended yup using a bog standard Exim setup, slightly buggered to 
accept only authenticated SMTP for relay purposes, but ordinary SMTP for 
mail destined for local clients.

Dovecote provides a way to download mail via POP, or not.

Oddly no one seems to attack the POP3 port much.


-- 
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper 
name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating 
or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its 
logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of 
the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. They must 
face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.

Ayn Rand.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux.slackware

csiph-web