On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 12:12:12PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Steve McIntyre] > > So, let me get this straight - fakepop will allow people to log in > > (using their username and password) in the clear and THEN tell them > > that they should have used POP over SSL instead. Quite how is this > > better than "connection refused"? > > "connection refused" generate a support request from the user, and > increases the load on the support organisation. The users will ask > what the error message mean, and will have to get the explanations > individually. A message poping up every time the user connect to the > wrong service will normally change the users behaviour without any > extra work for the support organisation. It appears that you have missed the point. One of the primary reasons why you would use pops rather than pop3 (I presume) is so that your authentication credentials aren't sent in the clear. This daemon allows the user to send their credentials en clair before telling them that they need to reconfigure their mail client. To quote the Guinness ad, "Brilliant!" - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature