From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <9front-bounces@9front.inri.net> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from 9front.inri.net (9front.inri.net [168.235.81.73]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9300234B2 for ; Thu, 16 May 2024 12:28:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from duke.felloff.net ([216.126.196.34]) by 9front; Thu May 16 06:27:15 -0400 2024 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 12:27:03 +0200 From: cinap_lenrek@felloff.net To: 9front@9front.org In-Reply-To: <4C1B6B746BF77B2F88319BBFCBFEB08C@driusan.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: abstract distributed enhancement-oriented STM framework Subject: Re: [9front] "Insecure" icon in gmail Reply-To: 9front@9front.org Precedence: bulk > 3. Would it make sense to add a flag to use startls but not validate certificates for upas/smtp? yes. i think that makes sense. Maybe "-C" as in disable thumbprint/certificate check? -- cinap