nanog mailing list archives
RE: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else]
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:48:32 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
your customers. As an example, it's not a suitable answer to our law firm customers who are critically-dependent on receiving e-mail from hopelessly broken senders.
I've always wondered why the bad guys can't wrap postal packages correctly or spell.
http://www.usps.com/postalinspectors/pos84.pdfOn the other hand, if you get a package that looks like that, is it really worth taking the chance? Appearences can be important.
Hopeless broken senders seem to figure out how to fix things when their critically important (sent via an unreliable e-mail) messages keep getting returned to sender.
Current thread:
- Re: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Stephen Satchell (Sep 12)
- RE: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Jason J. W. Williams (Sep 12)
- Re: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Andrew Sullivan (Sep 12)
- Re: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Steven Champeon (Sep 12)
- RE: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Jason J. W. Williams (Sep 12)
- RE: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Sean Donelan (Sep 12)
- Re: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Rich Kulawiec (Sep 18)
- Re: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Sean Donelan (Sep 18)
- RE: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] michael.dillon (Sep 19)
- Re: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Rich Kulawiec (Sep 19)
- Re: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Sean Donelan (Sep 20)
- Re: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Rich Kulawiec (Sep 22)
- RE: Criminals, The Network, and You [Was: Something Else] Jason J. W. Williams (Sep 12)