[no subject]

What precipitated my questioning of them escapes me, though.

I guess that's the first thing to go...my memory.

Jerald M. Sheets jr.
Sr. UNIX Systems Administrator
The Weather Channel Interactive
404.293.8762



On Dec 28, 2005, at 2:43 PM, W. Keith Miller wrote:

> Just to make a note, sometimes the zip decompressor scan only goes one
> deep (Mailscanner can be configured this way).  One idea if you must
> send a password protected zip is to bury the password protected one  
> 2 or
> more deep. Yes it is annoying. Of course other alternatives are to
> encrypt the package (ala gpg or PGP) or use a "drop point" .  Just  
> some
> thoughts. I do agree that Speedfactory is doing a bit of CYA .  I only
> wish these policy shifts would get posted so we don't find out about
> them the hard way (ala news feeds)
>
> K
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> runman wrote:
>
>> My ISP is Speedfactory and I chose them primarily because I
>> really wanted just a plain pipe - a static ip that worked, a
>> few email boxes and some disk space for a really small
>> family web site.  Nothing more.  No AOL-isms no Compu-Serve
>> proprietary browser, no Bell South taking me for an
>> expensive ride, nothing else - just a simple IP.
>>
>> Recently I attempted to send a friend an email with a
>> password protected zip file as an attachment.  The file
>> created an error on the mailserver - something about not
>> being able to examine the contents of the attachment.  I
>> called Speedfactory and talked first to a technician who
>> soon referred me to her supervisor (odd as most of the folks
>> who in the past have answered my calls were really
>> knowledgeable).  I was then told that Speedfactory's virus
>> checker choked on any attachment that it could not read.
>> What the h-e-double toothpicks ?????  Why is my ISP suddenly
>> having this requirement to "read my attachments" ???  I am
>> running both Norton AV and AVG (as well as MS Outlook) and
>> *none of them* has a problem with password protected files.
>> I would thought that my programs would be the most likely
>> culprits.
>>
>> While I don't usually password protect my attachments I
>> would certainly like the opportunity to do so if I want/need
>> to do so.  I don't think that this was a requirement when I
>> signed up and I have not been told since then that my ISP is
>> now in the mail-reading business.  Pres. Bush, the NSA, and
>> the Homeland Security bunch I understand, but my ISP ?????
>> (or are they all together now ??)
>>
>> Is anyone else aware of this ?? Any Speedfactory customers
>> out there perfectly happy with this ? ... am I (and possibly
>> Aaron) the only ones upset over this ?  Is this a case of a
>> stupid anti-virus program / stupid ISP or "homeland
>> non-security" gone wild or  am I just being paranoid /
>> expecting too much ???
>>
>> I can understand some idiots who expect an ISP to do what
>> should be the responsibility of the enduser but this is
>> crazy.  All ISP's should know that there are folks who will
>> encrypt mail as well as send stuff in crazy formats.  And
>> Speedfactory should know that they have many customers who
>> want a plain vanilla IP and no interference.  Has their
>> customer base changed or have they been taken over ???
>>
>> I guess if Speedfactory will continue this nonsense I will
>> be building my own mailserver and/or going somewhere else.
>> Somehow I get the feeling that they (Speedfactory) are going
>> downhill much like Mindspring did when they merged with
>> Earthlink.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
&gt;&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale";>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;
&gt; _______________________________________________
&gt; Ale mailing list
&gt; Ale at ale.org
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale";>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>



</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="00358" href="msg00358.html">[ale] Speedfactory now requires mail contents to be readable</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> runman at speedfactory.net (runman)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00375" href="msg00375.html">[ale] Speedfactory now requires mail contents to be readable</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> smeadspam100 at speedfactory.net (W. Keith Miller)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00376.html">[ale] old '99 bug still in latest Apache ?!</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00378.html">[ale] old '99 bug still in latest Apache ?!</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00375.html">[ale] Speedfactory now requires mail contents to be readable</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00364.html">[ale] Speedfactory now requires mail contents to be readable</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#00377"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#00377"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>

<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>