Hi,
> .................................................
> .................................................
> I wonder if PT actually guarantees you the "relay
> service", or if they
> were just to lazy to configure their SMTP server
> otherwise (as I know PT
> I suspect that the latter might be true).
Provider mail servers are meant to be used to send your mail, whatever
the from email address is, because many mail providers _don't_ even have
smtp servers (at least in the past). I always send all my emails
through the service provider's smtp server I'm currently connected to.
> Also remember that any PT customer is able to send
> mails using your ETH
> address though the PT relay.
> Thus even by examining
> the mail header, I
> can not verify that this mail is really coming from
> you (if you do not
> signature your mail)! As long as your mail has not
> been relayed by ETH's
> mail servers the authenticity of your mail is
> questionable.
As long as the email is not digitally signed, you can never be sure who
sent you the email, and you shouldn't really rely on the outgoing mail
server.... (hint: check this email's mail server)
> Ok, I know
> that it is possible to fake the headers by spoofing
> ETH's IP addresses,
> but this is outside the possibilities of infected
> PCs and spammers.
In order that an email is send, data has to be exchanged between both
participating parties.... To my knowledge, if you spoof your ip address,
no data gets back to you, so you get no TCP connection to the server.
> We need SMTP authentification over SSL, there is no
> way around this. The
> other solutions are temporal at best.
> Prepare that PT will block all non @pt.lu mails
> sometime in the future.
Well, maybe in a 100 years..... ;)
> Hope that they will warn you on time!
> Greeting, Patrick Kaell
Thibaut
Hi all,
I have successfully installed Slackware on both my test machine and my
laptop. My test machine has a parallel Windows partition, and my laptop
used to be running Windows.
However, I have the impression that on both machines, the quality of the
graphical image (under KDE) is not as good as with Windows on exactly
the same hardware.
My basic question is: what is the most likely cause:
-1- the fonts used -> i.e. would using the Windows TTF fonts make a
large difference ?
-2- the configuration for the monitor? For the desktop, I have put into
xorg.conf the values I found in my monitor's book; for the laptop, I
couldn't find the information yet so I left the defaults.
-3- the graphics card driver? The desktop has a ATI Radeon 7500, and I
use the X.org "radeon" driver. For the laptop, I ended up using "vesa",
short of anything specific available for an ATI 3D Rage LT Pro.
Any hints are welcome.
-pu
Hi,
I just stumbled upon some german documentation for fwbuilder:
http://kris.koehntopp.de/artikel/fwbuilder/
That presentation is also available as PDF.
In case you want to configure some iptables packet filtering,
without learning all the iptables details... it's a nice
somewhat CheckPoint-like GUI.
Greets Eric
Hello
I'm looking for a little prog, that shos me network traffic like this little
monitor in W2k (Excuse for the misword). Something like an applet in KDE to
show in Panel if there is network traffic, nothing else (Sthg like xnettload,
more or less for KDE).
Al
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
- -------- Original Message --------
Subject: demande d'information
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 14:15:57 +0200
From: michel perrot <michel_perrot __at__ hotmail __dot__ com>
To: <contact(a)linux.lu>
Messieurs,
Je vous remercie de faire savoir s'il existe un "produit tout prêt à
l'emploi" logiciel libre pour la gestion commerciale clients (ou plus
avec base de données)
Dans tous les cas merci de m'informer sur ce qu'il existe et ou puis-je
m'adresser
Cordialement
e-mail : bmperrot _at_ caramail _dot_ com <mailto:bmperrot __at__ caramail _dot_ com>
phone : 021 424 717
- --
Thierry Coutelier Président LiLux asbl
7, Rue Jacques Sturm L-2556 Luxembourg
Office:+352 710725 608 Home:+352 406776
http://www.linux.lu/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFA9pkdPOfrcNNQX7oRAvXxAJ9huk/7BGXYMZ5ro+I6rrJNzDXKVQCfUyZo
HmP0mj1Q4JCqE59LuXo494w=
=v98W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi,
for those interested in all (ok, many) aspects of networking
with Linux, and who'd like some german documentation - have
a look at the current special edition of Linux Magazin
"network edition".
It comes with a Debian 3.1 Sarge DVD, features articles on
networking services, physical interfaces, monitoring etc.
http://www.linux-magazin.de/Produkte/lms_2004_3.html
I got myself a copy (online order from friday, came today),
I'll bring it to tomorrow's meeting in case someone wants
to check it out.
Greetings, Eric
Hi,
I've got a strange kind of problem on Debian testing with
Mozilla and printing (cups).
I often want to print somewhat longer documents, but without
wasting too much dead trees. Therefore I print into a file,
do a psnup -2 to get two pages per sheet of paper, and print
the resulting postscript document.
When using Mozilla this way, the original postscript document
is fine, but the result of the psnup -2 is unusable, as the
fonts remain at the original size, i.e. the lower and right
parts of the pages get lost - no proper resizing of the page,
all in all. I verified this both with gv and gs (which
sometimes show slightly different results depending on the
postscript document, especially with graphics).
This same problem does not appear with postscript documents
generated from OpenOffice for instance.
Does anyone have an idea on how to go about fixing that
particular problem? I'm not overly experienced with printing,
so...
Greets & TIA, Eric
