[BlueOnyx:14916] Re: Squirrelmail broken again

[wcstaff at webcoast.com]

> Subject: [BlueOnyx:14915] Re: Squirrelmail broken again
> 
> Hi Chris and all,
> 
> >  There are few compelling reasons to do so (other than
> > inertia... which far from a good reason, can still be a
> > compelling one!)
> 
> Very good points, Chris. Let me add a bit from my point of view:
> 
> The inertia is surely catching up. I no longer consider CentOS 5 a
> viable hosting platform and I'm not alone in that assessment. The
> problem centers around OpenSSL, which for CentOS 5 is locked in at
v0.9.8e.
> 
> All front facing services and all internal libraries that rely on
> cryptology are compiled against that horribly outdated and crippled
> version of OpenSSL.
> 
> This trows a wrench into the available encryption ciphers and protocols
> for all services: HTTPS, POP3S, IMAPS, SMTPS, FTPS and also OpenSSH to a
> lesser degree. That is already hurting and it'll only get worse as more
> time passes.
> 
> If RedHat can't commit the resources to at least include a more modern
> OpenSSL into the next minor release, they should just give up and
> announce an earlier EOL date for RHEL5 (like Summer of 2014) and be done
> with it. They did it before (including a more modern OpenSSL as separate
> library and compiled the included services against it). I can't
> understand why they aren't doing that now.
> 
> While I have some faith that RedHat can keep PHP-5.3 patched until the
> currently scheduled EOL of RHEL5 (and its clones), the age of all
> services is showing and people are ceding a lot of security and
> usability related ground by clinging to CentOS 5 and its outdated
> services and libraries.
> 
> As for giving up features and usability: The new BlueOnyx GUI will
> probably enter public beta in four weeks.
> 
> I was contemplating making it available for CentOS 5 based BlueOnyx
> 5106R as well and there are reasons for doing it and reasons against it.
> Now that would require a lot of haggling and code bending or possibly
> upgrading the PHP of AdmServ to a newer PHP version.
> 
> Still, it would be like beating a half-dead horse.
> 
> I'm not sure I want to go there, because in the end it would make people
> feel that we're still 100% committed to an OS that for all intends and
> purposes should be phased out near term due to (almost criminal)
> negligence on behalf of RedHat.
> 
> Am I ranting? I guess I am. Nuff of that. :p
> 
> As for Squirrelmail: I indeed don't really care much about it. I did
> what I could to fix it after it got broken. But that again felt like
> beating a dead horse. Both Squirrelmail and OpenWebmail are horrible
> contraptions that I don't really want to bother myself with. Good
> alternatives are available and it's 2014. If "Back to the Future" is
> right, we'll have hoverboards next year. Still using pink roller blades
> from the '80's doesn't make any sense. :p
> 
> --
> With best regards
> 
> Michael Stauber
> _______________________________________________
Sometimes there is a little pain and anxiety with progression. But progress
is a good thing. 
As for myself, I'm all for progress, no matter how much more I have to work
to keep up. 
On the other side, my wife has a flip phone:)
Tom