<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Miles Associates LLC</title>
	<link>http://www.miles-assoc.com</link>
	<description>Jim Miles - Information Technology &#038; IT Security Consultant</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:52:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>Comment on Security Tip of the Month - SharePoint Security by Jack Tree</title>
		<link>http://www.miles-assoc.com/2007/security-tip-of-the-month-sharepoint-security/#comment-11</link>
		<author>Jack Tree</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:40:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.miles-assoc.com/2007/security-tip-of-the-month-sharepoint-security/#comment-11</guid>
					<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;The following comment seems a little like a commercial but the product looks interesting, applicable, and useful so I'm going to allow it. -jm&lt;/blockquote&gt;


Thanks for the great tips. I'm sure they will be useful for everybody. In addition I would secure SharePoint by checking and setting properly all security permissions. For doing this there is a new utility that was released just several days ago - &lt;a href="http://dl.scriptlogic.com/landing/beta/Security-Explorer-for-SharePoint.aspx" rel="nofollow"&gt;security explorer for SharePoint&lt;/a&gt;. The most interesting thing about this tool that it represents SharePoint farm as a tree where you can see all your sites and easy manage security permissions, assign SharePoint groups and permission levels, perform permission backup and restore.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The following comment seems a little like a commercial but the product looks interesting, applicable, and useful so I&#8217;m going to allow it. -jm</p></blockquote>
<p>Thanks for the great tips. I&#8217;m sure they will be useful for everybody. In addition I would secure SharePoint by checking and setting properly all security permissions. For doing this there is a new utility that was released just several days ago - <a href="http://dl.scriptlogic.com/landing/beta/Security-Explorer-for-SharePoint.aspx" rel="nofollow">security explorer for SharePoint</a>. The most interesting thing about this tool that it represents SharePoint farm as a tree where you can see all your sites and easy manage security permissions, assign SharePoint groups and permission levels, perform permission backup and restore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Spam technologies measured and compared by richij</title>
		<link>http://www.miles-assoc.com/2007/anti-spam-technologies-measured-and-compared/#comment-10</link>
		<author>richij</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:19:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.miles-assoc.com/2007/anti-spam-technologies-measured-and-compared/#comment-10</guid>
					<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;The comment below has been edited with phrases and links removed
   to keep the focus on the design and operational issues of the technology 
  and solution (not on the people).  

  I found these links on Richi's site to be very useful for my knowledge and 
  understanding, and in supporting his statement:
 - http://richi.co.uk/blog/2006/12/another-challengeresponse-datapoint.html
 - http://richi.co.uk/blog/2006/12/boxbe-another-cr-spamhaus.html (This 
       was of extra interest to me since I have a Boxbe address I use to 
       experience this technology myself).

  And also this link to Justin Mason's site, http://taint.org/2007/07/19/122638a.html, 
  which I think shows a valid consideration about the Spam Index referred 
  to in my post.

  I think it's interesting to reflect on my own situation, with a very low spam 
  index using gmail's spam tool and not a challenge-response system (I 
  only get about 1 message per week in Boxbe).  

&lt;/blockquote&gt;

====================
the edited comment follows:
====================
A very flawed study: challenge/response is a dreadful idea

Justin Mason and I have debunked this study [...]. 

More at [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The comment below has been edited with phrases and links removed<br />
   to keep the focus on the design and operational issues of the technology<br />
  and solution (not on the people).  </p>
<p>  I found these links on Richi&#8217;s site to be very useful for my knowledge and<br />
  understanding, and in supporting his statement:<br />
 - <a href="http://richi.co.uk/blog/2006/12/another-challengeresponse-datapoint.html" rel="nofollow">http://richi.co.uk/blog/2006/12/another-challengeresponse-datapoint.html</a><br />
 - <a href="http://richi.co.uk/blog/2006/12/boxbe-another-cr-spamhaus.html" rel="nofollow">http://richi.co.uk/blog/2006/12/boxbe-another-cr-spamhaus.html</a> (This<br />
       was of extra interest to me since I have a Boxbe address I use to<br />
       experience this technology myself).</p>
<p>  And also this link to Justin Mason&#8217;s site, <a href="http://taint.org/2007/07/19/122638a.html," rel="nofollow">http://taint.org/2007/07/19/122638a.html,</a><br />
  which I think shows a valid consideration about the Spam Index referred<br />
  to in my post.</p>
<p>  I think it&#8217;s interesting to reflect on my own situation, with a very low spam<br />
  index using gmail&#8217;s spam tool and not a challenge-response system (I<br />
  only get about 1 message per week in Boxbe).  </p>
</blockquote>
<p>====================<br />
the edited comment follows:<br />
====================<br />
A very flawed study: challenge/response is a dreadful idea</p>
<p>Justin Mason and I have debunked this study [&#8230;]. </p>
<p>More at [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Spam technologies measured and compared by pjbrockmann</title>
		<link>http://www.miles-assoc.com/2007/anti-spam-technologies-measured-and-compared/#comment-9</link>
		<author>pjbrockmann</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:32:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.miles-assoc.com/2007/anti-spam-technologies-measured-and-compared/#comment-9</guid>
					<description>Hi there. Thanks for the post.

I wanted to let you know that I have also made the Spam Index Calculator readily available on www.brockmann.com too. It uses Javascript so all the details stay in the browser and don't traverse the network.

Url is &lt;a href="http://www.brockmann.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&#38;Itemid=45" rel="nofollow"&gt;Calculator&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi there. Thanks for the post.</p>
<p>I wanted to let you know that I have also made the Spam Index Calculator readily available on <a href="http://www.brockmann.com" rel="nofollow">www.brockmann.com</a> too. It uses Javascript so all the details stay in the browser and don&#8217;t traverse the network.</p>
<p>Url is <a href="http://www.brockmann.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&amp;Itemid=45" rel="nofollow">Calculator</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
