Mobile code security (was Re: rr style scanning of non-customers)

Mon Jun 16 22:26:15 UTC 2003

Paul Vixie wrote:

> "text based" is not what i'd require.  "professional grade" is the right term.
> that can be anything from "xmh" to "eudora" as long as it was written to stand
> up to the worst the internet is capable of delivering to it.  "text based" is
> my own preferred crutch but you don't need "text based" to get "professional
> grade".

Is there a reason everyone leaves out poor lil' Mozilla which, while 
having a few quirks now and then, far out-performs the M$ code. Let's 
see. Better built in filtering (especially with imap), good thread 
support, support for simple html to allow partial rendering without 
setting off those spy tags, and the list goes on.

> you sure as hell need to be able to look at them, and to know they're present.
> bouncing them or stripping them are signs of extreme ignorance/irresponsibility
> and the people who sell/buy/deploy/whatever the technology that strips or
> bounces mime attachments "because of what they might contain" should get a
> clue.

Ignorance is the commonality of the Internet.

-Jack