4 ms·

Such considerations might be overkill for flickr/posterous but that does leave your "secret" email address in the logs of every smtp relay along the way. Its so

Such considerations might be overkill for flickr/posterous but that does leave your "secret" email address in the logs of every smtp relay along the way. Its sort of equivalent to putting a password in a URL.

mbenjaminsmith 16y ago
Yeah, we're not talking about credit card info. Why not have post@ plus a secret@ available in your options. The more technically inclined could easily use the second, most likely safe enough, system. I really hope they don't complicate an otherwise zen-like experience.
- piotrSikora 16y ago
  Security shouldn't be optional. And this wouldn't fix the issue at all... I bet that 80%+ of users would leave the default post@ submission address.
  - neilc 16y ago
    Security shouldn't be optional. That seems like a very dogmatic attitude. Security almost always comes at some cost (e.g., inconvenience), and sometimes that cost is not worth the benefit.
    - piotrSikora 16y ago
      Yes, I agree with you. It pretty much always comes at some cost and "user-friendliness" hurts most of the times. But it is exactly that "easy-to-use" design that leads to security holes like the one presented here. And I stand by what I wrote earlier, if you want to add some security options then they should be enabled by default. Having even the best security system in-place is useless when it's disabled. Isn't it?
  - jtheory 16y ago
    The cost -- if someone successfully manages to spoof their way into your posterous blog -- isn't very high. You'll probably notice fairly quickly, it's hard for "the bad guy" to use for actual gain, and there's no money involved either way. I use a service called Postful to send snail mail via email, that has security along these lines -- I email them a PDF with a mailing address in the subject line, and they post a letter and charge me a buck. They give security options (in my case, I include a "secret" word in the subject line, and there's a confirmation link that's emailed to me), but if I wanted, I could even let anyway send email to a given postful.com address, and it would mail a letter on my dime with no confirmation. I haven't heard about any abuses.
there 16y ago
if you're relaying mail through smtp servers you don't trust, i think you have bigger problems to worry about than someone posting a funny message to your weblog.
InclinedPlane 16y ago
"smtp relay along the way"? This isn't UUCP, the message will go from A to B across the internet backbone. There will only be SMTP relays along the way if either your email host or the receiver's email host has chosen to set things up that way. We'd have a much bigger problem with internet security if everyone's email was relayed through questionable servers as a matter of course.
- jrockway 16y ago
  Most residential DSL and cable users are prohibited from connecting to port 25, except on a special "smarthost". This machine, and anyone reading its logs, will learn your blog password. More secure than no password, but not secure.
  - InclinedPlane 16y ago
    [citation needed] More to the point, what you are saying is that your ISP can read your unencrypted internet traffic. This is not news.
  - olefoo 16y ago
    Fortunately most of the people who operate mail relays for ISPs are honest and responsible.

mbenjaminsmith 16y ago

Yeah, we're not talking about credit card info. Why not have post@ plus a secret@ available in your options. The more technically inclined could easily use the second, most likely safe enough, system. I really hope they don't complicate an otherwise zen-like experience.

piotrSikora 16y ago
Security shouldn't be optional. And this wouldn't fix the issue at all... I bet that 80%+ of users would leave the default post@ submission address.
- neilc 16y ago
  Security shouldn't be optional. That seems like a very dogmatic attitude. Security almost always comes at some cost (e.g., inconvenience), and sometimes that cost is not worth the benefit.
  - piotrSikora 16y ago
    Yes, I agree with you. It pretty much always comes at some cost and "user-friendliness" hurts most of the times. But it is exactly that "easy-to-use" design that leads to security holes like the one presented here. And I stand by what I wrote earlier, if you want to add some security options then they should be enabled by default. Having even the best security system in-place is useless when it's disabled. Isn't it?
- jtheory 16y ago
  The cost -- if someone successfully manages to spoof their way into your posterous blog -- isn't very high. You'll probably notice fairly quickly, it's hard for "the bad guy" to use for actual gain, and there's no money involved either way. I use a service called Postful to send snail mail via email, that has security along these lines -- I email them a PDF with a mailing address in the subject line, and they post a letter and charge me a buck. They give security options (in my case, I include a "secret" word in the subject line, and there's a confirmation link that's emailed to me), but if I wanted, I could even let anyway send email to a given postful.com address, and it would mail a letter on my dime with no confirmation. I haven't heard about any abuses.

there 16y ago

if you're relaying mail through smtp servers you don't trust, i think you have bigger problems to worry about than someone posting a funny message to your weblog.

InclinedPlane 16y ago

"smtp relay along the way"? This isn't UUCP, the message will go from A to B across the internet backbone. There will only be SMTP relays along the way if either your email host or the receiver's email host has chosen to set things up that way. We'd have a much bigger problem with internet security if everyone's email was relayed through questionable servers as a matter of course.

jrockway 16y ago
Most residential DSL and cable users are prohibited from connecting to port 25, except on a special "smarthost". This machine, and anyone reading its logs, will learn your blog password. More secure than no password, but not secure.
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  [citation needed] More to the point, what you are saying is that your ISP can read your unencrypted internet traffic. This is not news.
- olefoo 16y ago
  Fortunately most of the people who operate mail relays for ISPs are honest and responsible.