[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pfsense-dev
Subject:    [pfS-Dev] Fwd:  Blacklist downloads, please add authentication mechanism.
From:       Jim Thompson <jim () netgate ! com>
Date:       2014-01-10 15:16:14
Message-ID: CAKAfi7y2c28P-5npiXoyLb-6DOZhOp7tuVnuO=p4LPKzep+_MA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

forwarded without comment, other than this:

We do have a strategy here that leverages BGP for the feed(s), rather
than downloads of massive files.
This allows us to send updates much faster, and everybody wins.

It's been prototyped once (about a year ago), and is next up on the
list for one of the developers here.

Mr. Nichols is still invited to engage, if he wishes.

Jim

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Benjamin E. Nichols <webmaster@squidblacklist.org>
Date: Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: [pfS-Dev] Blacklist downloads, please add authentication mecha=
nism.
To: Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com>


I dont give a fuck what you do, I think you have a poor attitude and
are quite fucking arrogant. So, you can piss right off.



On 1/10/2014 6:41 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:


I=92m sure I already explained (yesterday, twice) that we have a
different strategy, and wrote to you yesterday (in response) to
open the line for exploring business terms.

If you=92re playing coy in public, then it=92s not really my loss.

jim

On Jan 10, 2014, at 8:22 AM, Benjamin E. Nichols
<webmaster@squidblacklist.org> wrote:

Well that is too bad for pfsense.  Its your loss not ours. The lists
from shalla.de are trash and everyone knows it.


On 1/10/2014 4:48 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:

It's not going to be implemented.

-- Jim

On Jan 10, 2014, at 5:50, Espen Johansen <pfsense@gmail.com> wrote:

Why dont you submit a patch for this? It sounds like 30 mins of code change=
s.

-lsf

10. jan. 2014 12:46 skrev "Ben Nichols" <mrnichols35@gmail.com> f=F8lgende:
>
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 18:52:17 -0600
> Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what you're asking here.
>
>   Im asking for a wittle check box that says "use authentication" for
>   basic and digest auth , a form with username and password. So our
>   subscribers who are interesting in using pfsense may do so. As that
>   is our mechanism for authentication.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > We plan to offer our own service.
> >
> > -- Jim
> >
> > > On Jan 9, 2014, at 15:17, "Benjamin E. Nichols"
> > > <webmaster@squidblacklist.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Blacklist downloads for web filtering, please add authentication
> > > mechanism.
> > >
> > > We have multiple clients who understand our blacklists are superior
> > > to the free lists and would like to use them with pfsense, however,
> > > we are not a free service and use basic auth for downloads,  I just
> > > thought I would nudge you guys again to see what kind of response I
> > > get since I am still getting emails requesting a solution.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Signed,
> > >
> > > Benjamin E. Nichols
> > > http://www.squidblacklist.org
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Dev mailing list
> > > Dev@lists.pfsense.org
> > > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
Dev@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/dev



_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
Dev@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/dev


-- =

Signed,

Benjamin E. Nichols
http://www.squidblacklist.org

_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
Dev@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/dev



-- =

Signed,

Benjamin E. Nichols
http://www.squidblacklist.org
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
Dev@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]