full-disclosure - Email legislation does not exist

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <25821.1078434028@www23.gmx.net>
From: Borbarad at gmxpro.net (Oliver Schneider)
Subject: Email legislation does not exist

> It's an old saying, but it rings true: My network, my machine, my rules.

Your mouth, your brain, your language ;)

If you understood the last few words it means that we use the same (roughly)
standardized language here to communicate. Just want to show that it is okay
to insist on your on standards at certain places, but there are places
enough where this does not hold true! The internet is IMO one of these "places".

You could not even read this mail without certain standards. I couldn't send
it without these standards. Having rules does not necessarily imply that a
single government creates new laws - who says that my SMTP server needs to run
on port 25, or my FTP on 21 and so on. Standards are not equal to
legislation!

Instead of the IANA one could probably agree to found a new bureau at the
UNO or elsewhere ... where the majority of nations could agree.

Don't get me wrong ... you still may do whatever you want in your network/
on your machine, but it might have some (negative?!) impact on your
connectivity ;-)

Oliver