 | | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) Well allow me to say that I am glad that Todd implemented this measure. Mostly because since it has been implemented, we have gotten rid of the annoying clone. And it will continue to help LUGNET remain a very nice friendly place that I (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) Likewise. I'm happy to see the authentication system implemented. It's been one of my longest-standing concerns about LUGNET's security, and frankly, I'm surprised we've gone as long as we have without it. (...) Yeah, that. I'm not sure what (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) Until said clone (or someone else) finds another way around it. (...) I enjoyed my time on Lugnet even when the clone was having fun - I just ignored the posts (mostly). (...) I also use the web to post 99% of the time, but I'm still not (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) But a seawall's not gonna help you against an earthquake... (...) ...if you use the web to post. Most of the people complaining use email or a newsreader to post, for which there's no way to "log on". ROSCO (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) It was hurricane season so a seawall was what was needed. If and when there is an earthquake likely that would be the time to do things to earthquake proof. (...) They should consider switching to the web mechanism or putting up with the (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) 8?) But life will be miserable if the earthquake hits with little or no warning. (...) So in other words, one annoying person has effectively forced many others to put up with an unnecessary (until now) inconvenience. I also use the web, and (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) Maybe we should take this offline to dig in further on cracking but I see this as really hard to crack. If you have some ideas on how to crack it, I suggest you send them directly to Todd so he can see if there's some angle he overlooked. I (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
while i understand the need for this system i think it would be easyer on alot of people if it (maybe as an option") simply did a reply send to verify the message instead of clikcing on a link, waiting for your browser to open, reading the message, (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> skrev i meddelandet news:GF7qJ4.6BM@lugnet.com... (...) a (...) Perhaps the (logged in) ones using the web interface should keep quite a while, to give the mail and NNTP (and slow modems in general) users (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
Hello Ross, hello everybody, (...) Yes, even if you may not like this concept. It has always been that way. Look at how many regulations you have to follow in your life outside the 'net. Most of those are only necessary, because there are also some (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
Hello Larry, hello everybody, (...) Let me first thank you for being one of those guys who try to keep a fair eye on all sides - Tood's, who continues to volunteer and make LUGNET an ever better place to be. - The Web Interface users, who, indeed, (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) Well, it took only 12 minutes to send a post, wait for email, click, and wait to see if the post made it... AndersI (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) I'm comfortable with *suggesting* that you switch. I don't see "should consider" as a sweeping statment that is dictating anything to you or not. You know what? I participate in a LOT of communities that *only* offer a web interface. People (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) Normally I use the web interface (for over a year now), but I have the NNTP still set up in Navigator, so I gave it a test shot. 1) Open 'lugnet.com' in NS/Messenger window 2) Try to add 'lugnet.off-topic.test', then realize that I already had (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
"Ray Sanders" <rsanders@svic.net> skrev i meddelandet news:GF8x71.8n7@lugnet.com... (...) slow (...) As you can see in my post above, MMV (12 minutes). Although I think 4.5 minutes is also quite a large amount of time to spend on one (or two) (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> skrev i meddelandet news:GF8s97.GDF@lugnet.com... (...) Might be a language issue, then. The first Swedish translation that came to mind was not *suggesting*, but quite a bit more imperatoresque (word?). (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) Yeh, that's a problem with Germanic languages other than English--zullen/sollen/etc are modals that correspond to "should" yet "should" also has the meaning of kunnen/koennen/etc. But to make matters even cloudier, you *can* use "should" in (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) I think the issue with a reply is that, unless something specific was required to entered into the mail, it is too easy to put replies on automatic pilot by automating the reply with a rule in your mail program. As soon as you do that, you (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
(...) Thanks for clarifying that. You're right. English has three common levels, here... "could" - meaning it's possible, no expression of preference, "should" - making a suggestion or expressing a preference "must" - the imperative in which you are (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message . (...) browser (...) Excuse me for just suggesting this option in another mail. I don't agree. A very simple way is to make the header look like this: Message_id 54dfDF7_&2532))sdrt4325ds which still is readable (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Email Authentication - Why not make it optional?
|
|
I see this now works. Let me thank you Todd & Co. Work much easier. Sonnich Sonnich Jensen <sonnich@hot.ee> wrote in message news:GFAL9v.6qo@lugnet.com... (...) on (...) program. (...) generated (...) 2 (...) time (...) use. (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jun-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
