Does anyone have a windows server here?

[neonerd]

Is anyone here willing to host for free perhaps one exchange account for me?

 

[n0cmonkey]

That's horrible.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
That's horrible.

Wait... what are we being sad for? Why Exchange, and why not just set that address up on the domain account?

 

[neonerd]

why is it horrible? I just wanted exchange because I know you can access an outlook-like program within you IE browser...also you can connect to it from anywhere like that. I just am very tempted about the idea of using an exchange account, but unfortunately don't have any windows servers

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: neonerd
why is it horrible? I just wanted exchange because I know you can access an outlook-like program within you IE browser...also you can connect to it from anywhere like that. I just am very tempted about the idea of using an exchange account, but unfortunately don't have any windows servers

qmail
postfix
sendmail
exim
squirrelmail
horde/imp
some other web front end

Why bother with exchange? I don't think anyone puts exchange on the border anyhow, do they?

 

[neonerd]

ms exchange > all others

at least that's my opinion

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: neonerd
ms exchange > all others

at least that's my opinion

What do you think it has that makes it a better MTA?

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: neonerd
ms exchange > all others

at least that's my opinion

What do you think it has that makes it a better MTA?

Active Directory integration on Windows 2000 network.

Which is why nobody in their right mind would give you an account in Exchange.

 

[neonerd]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: neonerd
ms exchange > all others

at least that's my opinion

What do you think it has that makes it a better MTA?

much better interface, synchronized emails between outlook and online exchange mailbox, and more stuff i can't remember off the top of my head

 

[Kilrsat]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: neonerd
why is it horrible? I just wanted exchange because I know you can access an outlook-like program within you IE browser...also you can connect to it from anywhere like that. I just am very tempted about the idea of using an exchange account, but unfortunately don't have any windows servers

qmail
postfix
sendmail
exim
squirrelmail
horde/imp
some other web front end

Why bother with exchange? I don't think anyone puts exchange on the border anyhow, do they?

I love the horde/imp combo, but OWA from Exchange 2003 really is the nicest looking webmail setup I've seen.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: neonerd
why is it horrible? I just wanted exchange because I know you can access an outlook-like program within you IE browser...also you can connect to it from anywhere like that. I just am very tempted about the idea of using an exchange account, but unfortunately don't have any windows servers

It's called Outlook Web Access. And that interface isn't any better than other mail systems - in fact a lot less secure because of the inherent problems with IIS.

Also understand that if someone else hosts your email account, and email is being sent from that server which does not have a reverse dns record for the domain, your email is going to get blocked by a lot of spam filters.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: neonerd

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: neonerd
ms exchange > all others

at least that's my opinion

What do you think it has that makes it a better MTA?

much better interface, synchronized emails between outlook and online exchange mailbox, and more stuff i can't remember off the top of my head

The interface is modifiable in SM, IMP, etc. And IMAP takes care of the rest.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: neonerd
ms exchange > all others

at least that's my opinion

What do you think it has that makes it a better MTA?

Active Directory integration on Windows 2000 network.

Which is why nobody in their right mind would give you an account in Exchange.

kerberos.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: neonerd
ms exchange > all others

at least that's my opinion

What do you think it has that makes it a better MTA?

Active Directory integration on Windows 2000 network.

Which is why nobody in their right mind would give you an account in Exchange.

kerberos.

And how is kerberos going to prevent neonerd from accessing other AD resources with his windows account?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: neonerd
ms exchange > all others

at least that's my opinion

What do you think it has that makes it a better MTA?

Active Directory integration on Windows 2000 network.

Which is why nobody in their right mind would give you an account in Exchange.

kerberos.

And how is kerberos going to prevent neonerd from accessing other AD resources with his windows account?

All resources and services should authenticate through kerberos.

You know AD is a mix of kerberos and LDAP, right?

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SagaLore

And how is kerberos going to prevent neonerd from accessing other AD resources with his windows account?

All resources and services should authenticate through kerberos.

You know AD is a mix of kerberos and LDAP, right?

I don't think you understand what I'm getting at. If I set you up with an email address on my Exchange server, I am also setting you up with a Windows 2k account courtesy of the Active Directory. That same username/password used to access email via OWA is also used to logon to the network. There are too many loops you have to jump through to lockdown that account's privelages; it just takes a simple shortsight to accidentally give that user access to something they shouldn't have, granted they can get past perimeter defenses.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SagaLore

And how is kerberos going to prevent neonerd from accessing other AD resources with his windows account?

All resources and services should authenticate through kerberos.

You know AD is a mix of kerberos and LDAP, right?

I don't think you understand what I'm getting at. If I set you up with an email address on my Exchange server, I am also setting you up with a Windows 2k account courtesy of the Active Directory. That same username/password used to access email via OWA is also used to logon to the network. There are too many loops you have to jump through to lockdown that account's privelages; it just takes a simple shortsight to accidentally give that user access to something they shouldn't have, granted they can get past perimeter defenses.

Oh, I get it now. Sorry, bad reader. I'll get my spanking later.

My point in mentioning kerberos is that it is another single sign on technology.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SagaLore

And how is kerberos going to prevent neonerd from accessing other AD resources with his windows account?

All resources and services should authenticate through kerberos.

You know AD is a mix of kerberos and LDAP, right?

I don't think you understand what I'm getting at. If I set you up with an email address on my Exchange server, I am also setting you up with a Windows 2k account courtesy of the Active Directory. That same username/password used to access email via OWA is also used to logon to the network. There are too many loops you have to jump through to lockdown that account's privelages; it just takes a simple shortsight to accidentally give that user access to something they shouldn't have, granted they can get past perimeter defenses.

Oh, I get it now. Sorry, bad reader. I'll get my spanking later.

My point in mentioning kerberos is that it is another single sign on technology.

I'll put it on my list of things to do.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SagaLore

And how is kerberos going to prevent neonerd from accessing other AD resources with his windows account?

All resources and services should authenticate through kerberos.

You know AD is a mix of kerberos and LDAP, right?

I don't think you understand what I'm getting at. If I set you up with an email address on my Exchange server, I am also setting you up with a Windows 2k account courtesy of the Active Directory. That same username/password used to access email via OWA is also used to logon to the network. There are too many loops you have to jump through to lockdown that account's privelages; it just takes a simple shortsight to accidentally give that user access to something they shouldn't have, granted they can get past perimeter defenses.

Oh, I get it now. Sorry, bad reader. I'll get my spanking later.

My point in mentioning kerberos is that it is another single sign on technology.

I'll put it on my list of things to do.

:lips: