| 1 |
On 8/16/20 10:50 PM, Caveman Al Toraboran wrote: |
| 2 |
> hi. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Hi |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> context: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> 1. tinfoil hat is on. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Okay. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> 2. i feel disrespected when someone does things to my stuff without |
| 13 |
> getting my approval. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Sure. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> 3. vps admin is not trusty and their sys admin may read my emails, |
| 18 |
> and laugh at me! |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Do you have any (anecdotal) evidence that this has actually happened? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Hanlon's razor comes to mind: |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by |
| 25 |
stupidity. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
My experience supports Hanlon's razor. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
This doesn't mean that there aren't malicious admins out there. Many in |
| 30 |
our industry have fun with the B.O.F.H. and P.F.Y. But I think that's |
| 31 |
more what we want to do -- if there were no repercussions -- and not |
| 32 |
what we actually do. *MANY* people talk a big game. I've seen few |
| 33 |
follow through on the boasting. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> 4. whole thing is not worth much money. so not welling to pay more |
| 36 |
> than the price of a cheap vps. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
That is your choice. I personally find that my email / DNS / website is |
| 39 |
worth ~$240 a year. I could probably do it for ~$120 a year if I wanted |
| 40 |
to drop redundancy. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
I could theoretically do it for $60 a year if I wanted to lower |
| 43 |
functionality. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
> moving to dedicated hardware for me is not worth it. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Fair enough and to each their own. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
I used to have dedicated hardware in my house, and then migrated to VPS |
| 50 |
based solutions as part of a cross country move without a static IP on |
| 51 |
the destination end. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
> my goal is to make it annoying enough that cheap-vps's admins find |
| 54 |
> it a bad idea for them to allocate their time to mingle with my stuff. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
I'd like to hear any (anecdotal) evidence of this happening that you have. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
If there is anything, I'd suspect that it's bulk Deep Packet Inspection |
| 59 |
monitoring things. I doubt that actual malicious involvement is common. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
> thoughts on how to maximally satisfy these requirements? |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
Well, seeing as how you're talking about email, the biggest elephant in |
| 64 |
the room is SMTP's default of unencrypted communications path. It's |
| 65 |
realtively easy to add support for encryption, but more systems than I'm |
| 66 |
comfortable with don't avail themselves of the optional encryption for |
| 67 |
some reason. Sure, it's possible to configure many receiving SMTP |
| 68 |
servesr to require it from specific sending systems and / or sending |
| 69 |
domains. But this is effort you have to expend to enact these restrictions. |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
Actual encrypted email; S/MIME, PGP, etc. help in this regard. |
| 72 |
|
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
|
| 75 |
-- |
| 76 |
Grant. . . . |
| 77 |
unix || die |
Archives