Re: [Nolug] Cox's idea about fighting spam

On Wednesday 11 June 2003 08:48 pm, Craig Lewis wrote:
> The only thing I have to add to this is, is that TLS works nicely in
> 'John's ' scenario, and it
> strengthens security, especially if your smtp authentication is using
> your 'system' password file
> or directory service. 'Most' imap/pop mail programs will support ssl on
> port 25 including pine.

If you can't connect to port 25, you won't be able to use SSL or anything
else. That is the current situation. You may only connect to port 25 of
smtp.east.cox.net and _no_other_mail_servers.

The way to circumvent this (which is VERY MUCH ON TOPIC folks) is to use any
one of a variety of IP tunnelling methods. In other words, VPN to a friendly
remote site that does not have such outbound restrictions to relay your mail
if you wish to avoid using Cox. I posted one using ssh. There are many
other ways to skin this cat. I can post a few if you're interested.

By the way, moaning, complaing, whining and gnashing of teeth about how much
you don't like cox and cable companies and whatever here isn't really doing
you a whole heck of a lot of good. You've only got charles here. He's an
engineer and a potentially sympathetic voice if you present a coherent
reasoned argument. But posting such complaints to NOLUG is preaching to the
choir. That's why I asked charles for a place to submit letters that will be
heard. I intend to write one and I hope that my opinion and reasoned
argument carries some weight considering my former position in the industry.

Around here, the best thing to do is show ways to get around it. I may be
putting my money where my mouth is and walking away from Cox.

-- 
Scott Harney <scotth@scottharney.com>
"...and one script to rule them all."
gpg key fingerprint=7125 0BD3 8EC4 08D7 321D CEE9 F024 7DA6 0BC7 94E5

___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org