<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for MPP and Beyond</title>
	<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews</link>
	<description>MPP, Email Security, Life, etc.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:40:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Backscatter Problems Persist by jsuto</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/05/02/backscatter-problems-persist/#comment-363</link>
		<dc:creator>jsuto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 08:41:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/05/02/backscatter-problems-persist/#comment-363</guid>
		<description>How about the following idea? Add a certain header line to every outgoing email (eg. X-Anti-Backscatter: xxxx).

Then if a bounce (coming from a mailer daemon) has not included our "X-Anti-Backscatter: xxxx" header line, then it is obviously not a legitimate (bounce) email, so can be dropped, marked, whatever.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about the following idea? Add a certain header line to every outgoing email (eg. X-Anti-Backscatter: xxxx).</p>
<p>Then if a bounce (coming from a mailer daemon) has not included our &#8220;X-Anti-Backscatter: xxxx&#8221; header line, then it is obviously not a legitimate (bounce) email, so can be dropped, marked, whatever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on MPP Community Edition? by mkatz</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/03/13/mpp-community-edition/#comment-362</link>
		<dc:creator>mkatz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:56:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/03/13/mpp-community-edition/#comment-362</guid>
		<description>We had this for a long time and recently removed, maybe we will re-post it.  Thank You.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We had this for a long time and recently removed, maybe we will re-post it.  Thank You.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on MPP Community Edition? by jsuto</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/03/13/mpp-community-edition/#comment-361</link>
		<dc:creator>jsuto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:43:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/03/13/mpp-community-edition/#comment-361</guid>
		<description>Ok, that sounds better :-) I think, it's worth to create a comparison table or chart including both the features and the supported anti-spam/-virus applications for the Community and the commercial version. Then one could see the difference between the two versions, as well as the intelligence in your framework present in the Community edition too. If you already have this chart then shame on me. Just an idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, that sounds better <img src='http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> I think, it&#8217;s worth to create a comparison table or chart including both the features and the supported anti-spam/-virus applications for the Community and the commercial version. Then one could see the difference between the two versions, as well as the intelligence in your framework present in the Community edition too. If you already have this chart then shame on me. Just an idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on MPP Community Edition? by mkatz</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/03/13/mpp-community-edition/#comment-360</link>
		<dc:creator>mkatz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:15:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/03/13/mpp-community-edition/#comment-360</guid>
		<description>Interesting interpretation and I thank you for your comment, but it was not what I was trying to say :-)  MPP Community adds much less overhead than AmavisD and we add value with our GUI, a simple installation, attachment size limits, email signatures that work for all email types, integrated WBL's, flexible warning controls, quarantine management and more.  What i am trying to say is that MPP Community is nothing like our commercial product.  There are many thousands of users of MPP Community so this is a message for them to take a look at our commercial product, it has evolved far past what it is available in this product.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting interpretation and I thank you for your comment, but it was not what I was trying to say <img src='http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  MPP Community adds much less overhead than AmavisD and we add value with our GUI, a simple installation, attachment size limits, email signatures that work for all email types, integrated WBL&#8217;s, flexible warning controls, quarantine management and more.  What i am trying to say is that MPP Community is nothing like our commercial product.  There are many thousands of users of MPP Community so this is a message for them to take a look at our commercial product, it has evolved far past what it is available in this product.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on MPP Community Edition? by jsuto</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/03/13/mpp-community-edition/#comment-359</link>
		<dc:creator>jsuto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 08:17:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/03/13/mpp-community-edition/#comment-359</guid>
		<description>I just wonder, why would anyone should use the MPP Community Edition, if it includes only SA and clamav? I mean, any skilled unix admin can set up these components in few minutes without the overhead of MPP. What added quality does MPP have to be worth to install? I think you are just saying that MPP Free Edition is &lt;a href="http://www.messagepartners.com/2008/03/04/mpp-community-edition/" rel="nofollow"&gt;a bunch of junk&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just wonder, why would anyone should use the MPP Community Edition, if it includes only SA and clamav? I mean, any skilled unix admin can set up these components in few minutes without the overhead of MPP. What added quality does MPP have to be worth to install? I think you are just saying that MPP Free Edition is <a href="http://www.messagepartners.com/2008/03/04/mpp-community-edition/" rel="nofollow">a bunch of junk</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Think Microsoft is Bad? You&#8217;ve seen nothing&#8230; by dynamodan</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/02/26/think-microsoft-is-bad-youve-seen-nothing/#comment-358</link>
		<dc:creator>dynamodan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/02/26/think-microsoft-is-bad-youve-seen-nothing/#comment-358</guid>
		<description>History will likely repeat itself.  Google just got farther than anyone else selling keywords, because their formula happened to work.  

But money corrupts.  When it corrupts to the point that typing keywords into Google no longer returns relevant results, then Google as we know it will cease to exist, and someone with a better idea will take over the search industry.

Who ruled the search scene before Google?  Anyone remember?  And what happened?  Told ya!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>History will likely repeat itself.  Google just got farther than anyone else selling keywords, because their formula happened to work.  </p>
<p>But money corrupts.  When it corrupts to the point that typing keywords into Google no longer returns relevant results, then Google as we know it will cease to exist, and someone with a better idea will take over the search industry.</p>
<p>Who ruled the search scene before Google?  Anyone remember?  And what happened?  Told ya!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Think Microsoft is Bad? You&#8217;ve seen nothing&#8230; by Keith P</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/02/26/think-microsoft-is-bad-youve-seen-nothing/#comment-357</link>
		<dc:creator>Keith P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2008/02/26/think-microsoft-is-bad-youve-seen-nothing/#comment-357</guid>
		<description>When looking at google traffic be careful! Your traffic probably is not "good" customer or potential customer traffic but auto-surfing click-bots that are actually visiting you! These click-bots have become very sophisticated and can use many methods to deter being detected for fraud like random timing of click and delays, multiple request headers from faked browsers, mutli-ip addresses from compromized PC and others. These tricks make it near impossible to identify specifically them as fraud and you'll pay and pay for what your think is traffic when it is just some criminal who is using a good honest business to hide behind. Trust me your traffic is not what you think!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When looking at google traffic be careful! Your traffic probably is not &#8220;good&#8221; customer or potential customer traffic but auto-surfing click-bots that are actually visiting you! These click-bots have become very sophisticated and can use many methods to deter being detected for fraud like random timing of click and delays, multiple request headers from faked browsers, mutli-ip addresses from compromized PC and others. These tricks make it near impossible to identify specifically them as fraud and you&#8217;ll pay and pay for what your think is traffic when it is just some criminal who is using a good honest business to hide behind. Trust me your traffic is not what you think!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on iPhone vs. Blackberry Review by The Ultimate iPhone vs Blackberry Roundup &#124; DorkBerry</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2007/11/13/iphone-vs-blackberry-review/#comment-349</link>
		<dc:creator>The Ultimate iPhone vs Blackberry Roundup &#124; DorkBerry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:01:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2007/11/13/iphone-vs-blackberry-review/#comment-349</guid>
		<description>[...] Message Partners (Winner: Blackberry) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Message Partners (Winner: Blackberry) [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on iPhone vs. Blackberry Review by iPhone vs. Blackberry Review</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2007/11/13/iphone-vs-blackberry-review/#comment-331</link>
		<dc:creator>iPhone vs. Blackberry Review</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:08:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2007/11/13/iphone-vs-blackberry-review/#comment-331</guid>
		<description>[...] post by mkatz and software by Elliott [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] post by mkatz and software by Elliott [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on My Date with Virtumond by Computer Software &#187; Computer Software June 24, 2007 10:34 pm</title>
		<link>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2007/06/24/my-date-with-virtumond/#comment-313</link>
		<dc:creator>Computer Software &#187; Computer Software June 24, 2007 10:34 pm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 02:38:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://messagepartners.com/mppnews/2007/06/24/my-date-with-virtumond/#comment-313</guid>
		<description>[...] My Date with Virtumond I found it amazing that all of the computer scientists at Frisk, Lavasoft, Enigma, Spybot and Symantec could not do the job that one guy did with his utility that ran in about 20 seconds. There are many conclusions that one could draw &#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] My Date with Virtumond I found it amazing that all of the computer scientists at Frisk, Lavasoft, Enigma, Spybot and Symantec could not do the job that one guy did with his utility that ran in about 20 seconds. There are many conclusions that one could draw &#8230; [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
