Re: EMAIL != FTP

[Wayne Bouchard <web () typo org>]

Actually, in a business environment (at least at my former company)
the mailings were large power point presentations and visio docs and
such.. All perfectly legitimate traffic. The funny thing about this is
that it was usually to folks in the same office who had access to (and
used) a central server. It would have been just as easy to send out a
pointer to the location of the doc and less destructive.

Is there anyone here who has NOT had to go in a rescue a mailbox that
was too large for the client to load? (And yes, this happened with
pine, outlook express, and a couple of others.. not just a random here
or there.) And dare I mention problems with POP servers and timeouts
over low speed links?

On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 11:45:13AM -0400, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> >     Sorry, can't resist replying here.  In my limited (7 years)
> > experience, 99% of all large file transfers via e-mail consist of dancing
> > babies, horny snowmen, clumsy reindeer/monkeys/people movie clips.  Oh,
> > did I mention the plethora of cutesy jack-o-lanterns around October
> > 31st?  I also find it remarkable that no one seems to protect these
> > 'sensitive' documents with PGP or another encryption method since we all
> > know that e-mail is in plain text.  What were you saying about ftp being
> > insecure?
>
> Right, but let's not leave out the attchment honorable mentions, things like
> ILOVEYOU, Snowwhite, etc.  ;-)  Perfect example of how email attachments can
> start a wildfire.
>
> --
> Robert Blayzor         IP Network Engineer, BOFH     BiznessOnline.com, Inc.
> rblayzor () thebiz net          noc () thebiz net           http://www.thebiz.net/
>
> FreeBSD, Putting the 'Operating' back into OS! -- http://www.freebsd.org/