Windows Steadystate used to do a decent job of this on XP.

What crime? Mr. Anaya is neither a law enforcement officer nor an IRS agent.

There's nothing illegal about money.

Seeing $800,000 is a criminal act? Well shit, there goes my plans for a money bin.

There was no transaction. Mr. Anaya is not a mandatory reporter of a cash transaction to begin with. For all Mr. Anaya knew, the money was withdrawn legally from an institution required to report, why should the onus/burden of enforcing the law fall to a car customizer? They're obviously just smacking him down for not playing nice nice in their ever plodding damn fool idiotic crusade against drugs. I don't think this sentence will stand on appeal. IANAL though.

It's really none of his business unless he explicitly knew he sold drugs for money, some people just have lots of money, that's not a crime in and of itself. And a reasonable person would probably want to safeguard $800,000 in cash, regardless of source.

Well that didn't take long.

It also looks bad when I can't say what the problem is, the ETA, what we are doing to work around it, etc.

I have a threefold problem with "cloud" storage/computing 1) Lack of control/physical security, up to and including removing my access to my own data due to a violation of some cockamamie TOS or similar agreement. 2) No ability to remedy downtimes, while rare, still do happen. 3) The ability of government agencies to scan my data for whatever they feel like arbitrarily and possibly without due process.

I prefer at the proxy level. Dansguardian/Squid/ClamAV is pretty easy to set up on your distro of choice.

Okay see what you are describing are best practices, which completely ignores the bad practices that organizations actually.......practice. They do bother, since it doesn't cost them a damn thing to get an invalid address bounceback to an address that isn't theirs. If you shotgun out enough messages about your 30 dollar dick pills and 1 percent of people buy them, congratulations, you've just made money.

I'd actually love to see a citation on this, I could google it but maybe you have an article handy. I generally err on the side of brute force or social engineering rather than out and out "hack" or system compromise.

It could very well have just been guessed, the spammers' mail servers are more than likely more than capable of shotgun blasting millions of messages to $randomstring@domain.com in less time than you'd think, and if you change the replyto address, you don't even get the bouncebacks.

I fail to understand the purpose of this law. If you don't fufill your contract with your provider, they generally have early termination fees and such in their contracts, why do they need the feds to enforce something that doesn't need to be enforced.?

Someone has to say it, may as well be me. What is this MSN?