<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 9 Jul 2015, at 16:39, Jules Field <<a href="mailto:Jules@ecs.soton.ac.uk" class="">Jules@ecs.soton.ac.uk</a>> wrote:</div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class=""></blockquote>smtp.ecs would offer an export-grade cipher, which OS X would refuse to use and then not opt to use something better. i *think* that's what was happening, none of the logs are detailed enough to show it well.<br class=""><br class="">Now it only offers ciphers which OS X (and everyone else) are happy with.<br class=""></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>BTW, I wonder if in hindsight this ties in with Apple fixing the Logjam issue with its 30th June patch?</div><div><br class=""></div><div><a href="https://blog.avira.com/logjam-vulnerability-threatens-thousands-of-https-websites-mail-servers/" class="">https://blog.avira.com/logjam-vulnerability-threatens-thousands-of-https-websites-mail-servers/</a></div><div><br class=""></div><div>If so, I guess Andy doesn’t need to submit anything.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Tim</div><div><br class=""></div></body></html>