Phishing and BGP Blackholing
blakjak at blakjak.net
Thu Jan 4 00:23:46 UTC 2007
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Joseph S D Yao wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 09:26:00AM +1300, Mark Foster wrote:
>> But there are worse offenses. HTML emails - every author has a choice
>> there, so that ones unforgivable IMHO. Top-Posting and Legalese Addendums
>> to messages are both things that an end-user in a COE corporate
>> environment has little control over.
> If you don't have personal control over the mail system you are using,
> it's possible that you don't have control over whether or not you use
> HTML. Your corporate mail system may be Dictated From On High [where
> the air is thin]. Sure, you can get an external mail account. But you
> can't even ask the vendor whether they use HTML, they may not know what
> you're talking about [isn't the Web the same as the Internet?], or the
> answer depends on the phase of the moon or other intangible variables
> [this has been observed].
Yeah, I could believe your observations - but I assumed (incorrectly?)
that _client side_ configuration items (such as whether to use plain text,
rich text or HTML) would still be available to an end user. Or to put it
another way, Group Policy (or similar) to forbid turning HTML _off_ would
seem to be, quite simply, stupid...
Thats enough of that now, anyway...
More information about the NANOG