Your lips (keys) to God's ears.
She won. She will now sport a lucrative career as a public... whatever. The narrative has been formed. Political Correctness has no room for objective truth. Just like the crumbling of lies surrounding the Rolling Stone/UVA 'rape', we shouldn't be looking at facts and events. Brianna's feels are more important.
Once again, the most dangerous group to women is formed of other women.
Please go do some fact checking. There are absolutely no credible sources that ever backed this nonsense
You're right. Official US government spokesmen are not a credible source. I'm sorry you missed that the comment was more of a statement about our government officials and stupid pronouncements of cause than an actual assignment of such.
I could have used the example of the riots over a newspaper cartoon.
Anyone believing the "terrorist" propaganda must somehow also believe that the DPRK has millions of bomb strapping terrorists stationed in the US ready to flock into Star and AMC to bomb people for watching a comedy.
Yes, because it takes millions of "bomb strapping terrorists" to blow up a bus load of civilians or a local school. Everyone knows that a successful terrorist attack takes millions of perpetrators.
Try "one". All it would take is one McVeigh-style ANFO device parked outside a big city theater to create a panic, helpfully propagated by the news media, just as they helpfully propagated the news about the millions of armed, I mean, ONE armed nut who took hostages at a Lindt store in Oz.
No movie theater manager wants to be the "one" that the "one" shows up at.
And if you doubt that a "movie" can trigger a violent reaction from political reactionaries, look no further than the Benghazi attacks that were caused by a movie.
"Return-Path" is an SMTP header
SMTP doesn't have headers. SMTP is a protocol for message transport.
thus changing the "From:" envelope address.
There is likewise no "From:" envelope address. There is an envelope-sender (the argument to the SMTP "MAIL FROM" command) which is often inserted into a "Return-Path" header in the message, and is used in the mailbox separator "From" line in mbox email storage.
... still can't stop phishers from forging the "From:" header, which is just part of the body of the e-mail.
The "From:" header is a header, not something in the body of the message. As a header, it is subject to rewriting by transport agents.
Unfortunately, the envelope address usually never gets to the MUA,
The MUA has access to all headers in an email, including "Return-Path". It is usually never shown to the user, but a good MUA will have an option to show raw email, including headers. Why? For just this reason.
If you use an MUA like Outlook that hides all the technical info, it's easy to be fooled.
Well, there you go. I did say a GOOD MUA
There are several issues at play here:
1. Employees at a company that manages a huge part of the control of the Internet can't detect phishing email by looking at the address replies will go to.
2. The email system at said company creates email replies based on information that is supposed to be used ONLY for the transport system to report delivery issues.
3. The offline verification process intended to stop such fraud worked, which makes this a non-story from the beginning.
The fact that the system was engineered to rely on root name servers does not mean that that is the only way it could have been, or can be engineered.
In any event, naysayers like you have a very poor track record on predictions.
I apologize for the pedantry, but the GP is correct, the conclusion of the line was "and your chicks for free".
If they break DNS, we'll just move to a shadow system, whether based on hosts or just another flavor of DNS.
This all misses the point. The way most illegal immigrants come into and stay in the US is not by sneaking through the desert. It's by passing in on a tourist visa and then just not leaving.
Figure out a way to fix that problem that doesn't involve house to house searching and random checkpoints, and you get a gold star.