On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 16:19 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 16:48 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 20:47 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote: > > > William L. Maltby wrote: > > > > <snip> > > I don't even like it that your (CentOS's) monthly reminder to me is sent > > with password unencrypted... and I am the only user here. If I could > > post my public key and have that monthly reminder encrypted, I'd do it. > > > > You can turn it off in your preferences for the list in mailman: > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/options/centos I know. Just haven't gotten around to it. > > > > access to emails being sent to that address, its sort of academic > > > getting the passwd anyway ( click on forgot passwd, new passwd emailed > > > out ...etc ) > > > > Well, it's too bad that we can't make all access via SS* w/no passwords > > required. But a new one-time-only-use password (IOW, it must be changed > > on first use and w/i a specified time interval) isn't too bad. > > > We didn't write mailman ... nor did we write the probe e-mail that it > sends. I *know* that. It was not a personal or project attack. But the answer to my concern that was posted (it is sent to... so... <equiv to everything's probably OK>) got one of my feet on the soap box. :-( Didn't mean to seem critical. All that not withstanding, I believe we can't be to relaxed about security and even *dumb* concerns (as mine might be) are worth noting or discussing. > <snip sig stuff> Thanks, -- Bill -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060512/553d1c42/attachment-0005.sig>