On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:56:57AM +0200, Joerg Morbitzer wrote:
> I just did a fresh sendmail installation on Debian Etch getting this
> auto-generated new /etc/mail/access file:
>
> titan:~# grep "^Connect:.*RELAY" /etc/mail/access
> Connect:localhost
If sendmail would do a double lookup verify on the reverse DNS records,
there would be no problem at all.
When some obscure IP address has reverse DNS pointer record "localhost"
and sendmail would do another lookup to see what IP address belongs to
"localhost", then it would n
g because sshd does not what is documented. Suppose
> sshd_config had an option "PermitRootLogin always", meaning that no
> password or key is required to log in as root. Would it be a bug of sshd
> to include this option or a misfeature?
Of course not. And being able to add an option to sendma
Lupe Christoph wrote:
> OK, I give up. And shut up.
>
> Please file a bug against the sendmail package, with the information
> that sendmail allows you to enter "Connect:localhost RELAY" in
> /etc/mail/access.
>
> And another one that "Connect:127.0.
On Tuesday, 2009-08-11 at 10:32:04 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Lupe Christoph [090810 21:13]:
> > > Almost all security holes need to user to do something. (If only to
> > > power up the machine, to install some packages, to connect to the
> > > internet, to give accounts to users). The que
OK, I give up. And shut up.
Please file a bug against the sendmail package, with the information
that sendmail allows you to enter "Connect:localhost RELAY" in
/etc/mail/access.
And another one that "Connect:127.0.0.1 RELAY" opens up the same hole as
"Connect:localhost
reverse resolution of 'localhost'. Doing
a small test shows that sendmail on etch seems to be vulnerable, too. I
need to have a localhost RELAY line in my access file (which is not
default AFAIK).
Will there be a DSA on this issue, since it seems to turn Sendmail
installations wi
* Lupe Christoph [090810 21:13]:
> > Almost all security holes need to user to do something. (If only to
> > power up the machine, to install some packages, to connect to the
> > internet, to give accounts to users). The question cannot be that
> > something has to be done do make people vulnerabl
for hosts having a reverse resolution of 'localhost'. Doing
> > > a small test shows that sendmail on etch seems to be vulnerable, too. I
> > > need to have a localhost RELAY line in my access file (which is not
> > > default AFAIK).
> > > Will there be a
* Lupe Christoph [090810 13:53]:
> On Monday, 2009-08-10 at 13:46:38 +0200, Thomas Liske wrote:
>
> > last week, there was an article on heise security about MTAs[1] which
> > relay mails for hosts having a reverse resolution of 'localhost'. Doing
> > a smal
* Jan de Groot [090810 14:22]:
> On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 14:03 +0200, Thomas Liske wrote:
> > if an access line like:
> >
> > Connect:localhost RELAY
> >
> > turns a MTA into an Open Relay than I would prefere a DSA, since the
> > ACL
> > implementation is broken IMHO.
>
> As long as r
Re,
Jan de Groot wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 14:03 +0200, Thomas Liske wrote:
if an access line like:
Connect:localhost RELAY
turns a MTA into an Open Relay than I would prefere a DSA, since the
ACL
implementation is broken IMHO.
As long as reverse DNS can be faked, I would
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 14:03 +0200, Thomas Liske wrote:
> if an access line like:
>
> Connect:localhost RELAY
>
> turns a MTA into an Open Relay than I would prefere a DSA, since the
> ACL
> implementation is broken IMHO.
As long as reverse DNS can be faked, I would never use hostn
se resolution of 'localhost'.
>>> Doing a small test shows that sendmail on etch seems to be
>>> vulnerable, too. I need to have a localhost RELAY line in my access
>>> file (which is not default AFAIK).
>>> Will there be a DSA on this issue, si
Re,
#Lupe Christoph wrote:
On Monday, 2009-08-10 at 13:46:38 +0200, Thomas Liske wrote:
last week, there was an article on heise security about MTAs[1] which
relay mails for hosts having a reverse resolution of 'localhost'. Doing
a small test shows that sendmail on etch s
On Monday, 2009-08-10 at 13:46:38 +0200, Thomas Liske wrote:
> last week, there was an article on heise security about MTAs[1] which
> relay mails for hosts having a reverse resolution of 'localhost'. Doing
> a small test shows that sendmail on etch seems to be vulnerable,
Hi,
last week, there was an article on heise security about MTAs[1] which
relay mails for hosts having a reverse resolution of 'localhost'. Doing
a small test shows that sendmail on etch seems to be vulnerable, too. I
need to have a localhost RELAY line in my access file (wh
On Tuesday, 2006-08-29 at 09:06:46 +0200, Lupe Christoph wrote:
> I still have dependency problems with the sendmail update on Stable.
> I only get libsasl2 2.1.19-1.5sarge1 from security.debian.org while
> the sendmail-bin package depends on libsasl2 (>= 2.1.19.dfsg1).
> When ca
Hi!
I still have dependency problems with the sendmail update on Stable.
I only get libsasl2 2.1.19-1.5sarge1 from security.debian.org while
the sendmail-bin package depends on libsasl2 (>= 2.1.19.dfsg1).
When can one expect to be able to install the sendmail update?
Thank you,
Lupe Christ
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:17:06AM -0400, Paul Nesbit wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 08:23:59AM +0200, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > [...]
> > a MIME conversion routine in sendmail, a powerful, efficient, and
> > scalable mail tra
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:17:06AM -0400, Paul Nesbit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 08:23:59AM +0200, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > [...]
> > a MIME conversion routine in sendmail, a powerful, efficient, and
> > sca
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 08:23:59AM +0200, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> [...]
> a MIME conversion routine in sendmail, a powerful, efficient, and
> scalable mail transport agent, could be tricked
> [...]
Funny, bias in errata reports.
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
And if you just install libsasl2 2.1.19.dfsg1 from DSA 1155-2, you end
up with a number of other failing dependecies:
canardo:/tmp# apt-get dist-upgrade
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these.
The following pac
Package: sendmail-bin
Version: 8.13.4-3sarge2
Severity: grave
Tags: sarge, security
Hello,
the just released security fix package 8.13.4-3sarge2 does not install
on sarge, because it depends on libsasl2 (>= 2.1.19.dfsg1) while on
sarge only libsasl2 (2.1.19-1.5sarge1) is available.
Pack
Hi,
The version of Sendmail in sarge is vulnerable to CVE-2006-1173 from what I
can determine, and there's been a fixed version in testing for some time,
but what's happened to stable?
regards
Andrew
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubs
Sourced from AusCERT.
andrew
-- Forwarded message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 23:49:01 UT
Subject: [NATIONAL-ALERTS] (AUSCERT AL-2006.0048) [UNIX/Linux][Win] -
Sendmail fails to handle malformed multipart MIME messages
To:
Hello,
Richard A Nelson a écrit (Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:53:43AM -0700) :
> >- is it mandatory to use /etc/mail/sendmail.conf?
>
> No, not at all
>
> >- is there a way to manually configure sendmail the classical way
>
> set this variable in /etc/mail/sen
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Emmanuel Halbwachs wrote:
For some reasons, the admins didn't configure sendmail "the Debian
way" and didn't use the queue aging feature in
/etc/mail/sendmail.conf.
- is it mandatory to use /etc/mail/sendmail.conf?
No, not at all
- is there a way t
.
After a look in the preinst scripts, there is something like :
/var/lib/dpkg/info# grep cron.d/sendmail sendmail*preinst
sendmail-base.preinst: if [ -f /etc/cron.d/sendmail ]; then
sendmail-base.preinst: echo "#preinst" > /etc/cron.d/sendmail;
sendma
/sendmail has been tailored to our needs and has been
reverted to a standard Debian one by the upgrade.
Very sorry for the noise and thanks for your collaboration.
Can you mail me more details... there is support in
/etc/mail/sendmail.conf to automagically support the type of queue aging
that you are
* Stephen Gran [Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:45:52 +]:
> This one time, at band camp, Emmanuel Halbwachs said:
> > /etc/cron.d/sendmail has been tailored to our needs and has been
> > reverted to a standard Debian one by the upgrade.
> > Very sorry for the noise and thanks f
All seems ok here.
Can you be more specific about the problems you are having?
Hans.
Le vendredi 24 mars 2006 à 18:31 +0100, Emmanuel Halbwachs a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> We are experiencing problems after the sendmail security upgrade on
> our mailhost.
>
> - do some other pe
>
> OK, the problem was on our side:
>
> /etc/cron.d/sendmail has been tailored to our needs and has been
> reverted to a standard Debian one by the upgrade.
>
> Very sorry for the noise and thanks for your collaboration.
A file in /etc that was overwritten silently is a b
Hello again,
Emmanuel Halbwachs a écrit (Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 06:57:43PM +0100) :
> - after the upgrade : in some cases (more on this below), incoming
> mail goes to /var/spool/mqueue/daily and is stuck there
OK, the problem was on our side:
/etc/cron.d/sendmail has been tailored to our
Hans a écrit (Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 12:38:01PM -0500) :
> Can you be more specific about the problems you are having?
I am not the guy who administer the mailhost, but I just talk to my
fellow postmaster. I'll try:
- the sendmail config uses 6 queues: in, out, in.hourly, out.hourly,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 12:38:40PM -0500, Chris Hilts wrote:
If you can find a .deb of the package version you want, something like:
dpkg --force-downgrade --install sendmail-whatever.deb
should do the trick. Be aware that forcing a downgrade doesn't check
for dependencies on the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Emmanuel Halbwachs wrote:
> We are experiencing problems after the sendmail security upgrade on
> our mailhost.
What sort of problems, exactly?
> - is there a way to downgrade the sendmail packages to the previous
> version before the
Hello,
We are experiencing problems after the sendmail security upgrade on
our mailhost.
- do some other people out there are experiencing some troubles after
this upgrade ?
- is there a way to downgrade the sendmail packages to the previous
version before the security fix ? (i. e
Andreas Piper wrote:
> ISS has reported a serious flaw in sendmail before 8.13.6, see
> http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/216 and
> http://sendmail.org/8.13.6.html
>
> Is a security fix of the sendmail-package(s) in view, or should I try to
> install sendmail 8.13.6 sta
* Andreas Piper ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060323 09:45]:
> Hello,
> ISS has reported a serious flaw in sendmail before 8.13.6, see
> http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/216 and
> http://sendmail.org/8.13.6.html
>
> Is a security fix of the sendmail-package(s) in view,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 09:44:38AM +0100, Andreas Piper wrote:
>Hello,
>ISS has reported a serious flaw in sendmail before 8.13.6, see
>http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/216 and
>http://sendmail.org/8.13.6.html
>
>Is a security fix of the sendmail-package(s) in view,
Hello,
ISS has reported a serious flaw in sendmail before 8.13.6, see
http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/alerts/id/216 and
http://sendmail.org/8.13.6.html
Is a security fix of the sendmail-package(s) in view, or should I try to
install sendmail 8.13.6 standalone?
Thanks,
Andreas
The last case does cause two occurances of Slocal_greet_pause... but
unlike the Bat book V2 (still gotta get V3), sendmail doesn't complain
- and does the right thing.
I'd be happy to look over you setup if you'd like... If you've got
anything that might be generally applicable,
One of my mail servers runs sendmail and some extra security features
are implemented in the Local_check_relay ruleset---in particualr it only
allows a small list of IP addresses to connect.
There are also a few other Local_check_* rulesets which are non-standard
and do things like tweaking the
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> because it would=20
>remove apache and many other packages wich are depending on a MTA. So=20
>can I "fake" the sendmail installation, so apt-get would see that=20
>sendmail has been upgraded, or do I have upgra
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 12:46:01PM +0200, LeVA wrote:
> I have installed postfix from sources a while ago, and now there is a
> security update fro sendmail. As you probably know, I can not remove
> the sendmail package (although I'm not using it), because it would
> remov
On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 12:46, LeVA wrote:
> I have installed postfix from sources a while ago, and now there is a
> security update fro sendmail. As you probably know, I can not remove
> the sendmail package (although I'm not using it), because it would
> remove apache and ma
Hi!
I have installed postfix from sources a while ago, and now there is a
security update fro sendmail. As you probably know, I can not remove
the sendmail package (although I'm not using it), because it would
remove apache and many other packages wich are depending on a MTA. So
can I
Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> How do you send the previous Message ?
>
> If a resond to it, I get in 'mutt' the error Message:
>
> sendmail: 550 Error: Message content rejected
>
The message from Russel had Content-Type: text/plain; chars
Hello Russel,
How do you send the previous Message ?
If a resond to it, I get in 'mutt' the error Message:
sendmail: 550 Error: Message content rejected
Greetings
Michelle
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917
Are you able to ping 64.4.33.7 !?
If so, try 'telnet 64.4.33.7 25' next to get a smtp prompt.
If nothing works look at your connection: Firewall rules etc.
Beside that your sendmail seems to work.
Christian
- Original Message -
From: "arun raj" <[EMAIL PROTEC
hello,
I am using sendmail 8.12 in redhat linux9.0 to send
mail.It sends the
message between the
internal network. But it doesnot send the message to
the external network.
I want to send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] But it is not
sending mail.The
following logs are generated in maillog .
>From
Are you able to ping 64.4.33.7 !?
If so, try 'telnet 64.4.33.7 25' next to get a smtp prompt.
If nothing works look at your connection: Firewall rules etc.
Beside that your sendmail seems to work.
Christian
- Original Message -
From: "arun raj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
hello,
I am using sendmail 8.12 in redhat linux9.0 to send
mail.It sends the
message between the
internal network. But it doesnot send the message to
the external network.
I want to send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] But it is not
sending mail.The
following logs are generated in maillog .
>From
routines:SSL3_GET_RECORD:decryption failed or
bad record mac:s3_pkt.c:424:
Mozilla doesn't cause this error. and no other evolution user seems to
be complaining about this. But I can duplicate the error on all the
Debian sid boxes I have by just upgrading and then removing and
reinstalling sen
routines:SSL3_GET_RECORD:decryption failed or
bad record mac:s3_pkt.c:424:
Mozilla doesn't cause this error. and no other evolution user seems to
be complaining about this. But I can duplicate the error on all the
Debian sid boxes I have by just upgrading and then removing and
reinstalling sendmail.
Richard A Nelson wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Jeff Wiegley wrote:
I'm very tired of struggling with sendmail to get it to support STARTTLS
and SMTPAUTH under debian.
More on this in a minute...
STARTTLS is a pretty easy single include line in the .mc files.
Yes, and more secu
Richard A Nelson wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Jeff Wiegley wrote:
I'm very tired of struggling with sendmail to get it to support STARTTLS
and SMTPAUTH under debian.
More on this in a minute...
STARTTLS is a pretty easy single include line in the .mc files.
Yes, and more secure to
Jeff Wiegley said on Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:08:35AM +:
> What is the easiest method (preferrably one that doesn't require sasl)
> to get AUTH setup so that:
> 1) non-STARTTLS connections do NOT offer PLAIN or LOGIN, and
> 2) STARTTLS connections do honor PLAIN or LOGIN?
>
> I'm 100% again
Jeff Wiegley said on Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:08:35AM +:
> What is the easiest method (preferrably one that doesn't require sasl)
> to get AUTH setup so that:
> 1) non-STARTTLS connections do NOT offer PLAIN or LOGIN, and
> 2) STARTTLS connections do honor PLAIN or LOGIN?
>
> I'm 100% again
Jeff Wiegley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm 100% against sasl in general just for the simple fact that the
> developers have chosen to store passwords and user credentials in
> PLAINTEXT in a file on the filesystem. (add to that the need to
> maintain and synchronize two different databases or
Jeff Wiegley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm 100% against sasl in general just for the simple fact that the
> developers have chosen to store passwords and user credentials in
> PLAINTEXT in a file on the filesystem. (add to that the need to
> maintain and synchronize two different databases or
I'm very tired of struggling with sendmail to get it to support STARTTLS
and SMTPAUTH under debian.
STARTTLS is a pretty easy single include line in the .mc files.
but AUTH is a real pain.
What is the easiest method (preferrably one that doesn't require sasl)
to get AUTH setup so
mething is seriously broken with some sort of
decryption routine. My other, older debian box didn't have this
problem until I did this:
apt-get remove --purge sendmail sasl2-bin
rm -rf /etc/mail
apt-get install sasl2-bin
apt-get install sendmail
remake the .cf files and then restart a
I'm very tired of struggling with sendmail to get it to support STARTTLS
and SMTPAUTH under debian.
STARTTLS is a pretty easy single include line in the .mc files.
but AUTH is a real pain.
What is the easiest method (preferrably one that doesn't require sasl)
to get AUTH setup so that
seriously broken with some sort of
decryption routine. My other, older debian box didn't have this
problem until I did this:
apt-get remove --purge sendmail sasl2-bin
rm -rf /etc/mail
apt-get install sasl2-bin
apt-get install sendmail
remake the .cf files and then restart a
On Friday 19 September 2003 23:27, Richard A Nelson wrote:
Hi Richard,
> aha... in my case (all my boxen, in fact) the certificate just
> expired !!!
> I ran /usr/share/sendmail/update_tls new to create a new set of
> certificates and things are now kosher !
> Sep 19 21:22:20 re
On Friday 19 September 2003 23:27, Richard A Nelson wrote:
Hi Richard,
> aha... in my case (all my boxen, in fact) the certificate just
> expired !!!
> I ran /usr/share/sendmail/update_tls new to create a new set of
> certificates and things are now kosher !
> Sep 19 21:22:20 re
adable! Now, before you
> > scream RTFM, I did use GroupReadableKeyFile!
>
> please copy "/usr/share/sendmail/examples/starttls.m4 to /etc/mail/tls and
> execute 'sendmailconfig' after you copied the file over.
>
> It's an updated file you have to use by
uot;/usr/share/sendmail/examples/starttls.m4 to /etc/mail/tls and
execute 'sendmailconfig' after you copied the file over.
It's an updated file you have to use by now. You should have read the install
message by the sendmail update and the changelog too ;p
You have to do the same wit
adable! Now, before you
> > scream RTFM, I did use GroupReadableKeyFile!
>
> please copy "/usr/share/sendmail/examples/starttls.m4 to /etc/mail/tls and
> execute 'sendmailconfig' after you copied the file over.
>
> It's an updated file you have to use by
I cannot get STARTTLS to work with the newest snendmail in unstable. It
*always* complains that the key file is group readable! Now, before you
scream RTFM, I did use GroupReadableKeyFile!
I updated to sendmail 8.12.10-1 to patch CAN-2003-0681 CAN-2003-0694
When I startup I get...
sm-mta
uot;/usr/share/sendmail/examples/starttls.m4 to /etc/mail/tls and
execute 'sendmailconfig' after you copied the file over.
It's an updated file you have to use by now. You should have read the install
message by the sendmail update and the changelog too ;p
You have to do the same wit
I cannot get STARTTLS to work with the newest snendmail in unstable. It
*always* complains that the key file is group readable! Now, before you
scream RTFM, I did use GroupReadableKeyFile!
I updated to sendmail 8.12.10-1 to patch CAN-2003-0681 CAN-2003-0694
When I startup I get...
sm-mta
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 01:47:28AM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:58:49PM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
> >
> > > Was there any particular reason that this newer fixed version has a
> > > version number the makes it look
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:58:49PM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
>
> > Was there any particular reason that this newer fixed version has a
> > version number the makes it look older than the exploitable version?
>
> Simple: it doesn't. The version in s
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:58:49PM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
> Was there any particular reason that this newer fixed version has a
> version number the makes it look older than the exploitable version?
Simple: it doesn't. The version in stable is 8.12.3-4, and the version on
security.debian.
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 01:47:28AM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:58:49PM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
> >
> > > Was there any particular reason that this newer fixed version has a
> > > version number the makes it look
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:58:49PM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
>
> > Was there any particular reason that this newer fixed version has a
> > version number the makes it look older than the exploitable version?
>
> Simple: it doesn't. The version in s
Hi all. I took preventative measures to protect my exploitable sendmail
until I could get the new package installed on my mail server (running
Debian Stable). I did the usual sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get
upgrade but wasn't seeing the new package.
A little bit of investigati
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:58:49PM -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
> Was there any particular reason that this newer fixed version has a
> version number the makes it look older than the exploitable version?
Simple: it doesn't. The version in stable is 8.12.3-4, and the version on
security.debian.
Hi all. I took preventative measures to protect my exploitable sendmail
until I could get the new package installed on my mail server (running
Debian Stable). I did the usual sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get
upgrade but wasn't seeing the new package.
A little bit of investigati
In all fairness, if this issue is in regards to the Verisign cluster
fsck I don't think this has any place in Sendmail personally but rather
in getting Verisign to un-fsck the problem and/or fix DNS servers not to
respond in that manner as to allow that to happen...
Re
In all fairness, if this issue is in regards to the Verisign cluster
fsck I don't think this has any place in Sendmail personally but rather
in getting Verisign to un-fsck the problem and/or fix DNS servers not to
respond in that manner as to allow that to happen...
Re
Hi list,
You know, as DSA-384-1, sendmail buffer overflow vulnerability
is fixed but another hole "sendmail relay access restrictions
can be bypassed with bogus DNS"(*) is NOT fixed yet.
* http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=174907
Do you know why maintainer let
Hi list,
You know, as DSA-384-1, sendmail buffer overflow vulnerability
is fixed but another hole "sendmail relay access restrictions
can be bypassed with bogus DNS"(*) is NOT fixed yet.
* http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=174907
Do you know why maintainer let
t; 28406 ?S 0:00 /usr/sbin/sendmail -i
> -FCronDaemon -odi -oem root
>
> I have postfix installed, and I'm not sure if
> this is a normal thing, or else a rogue process,
> or just a cron job that got stuck. As around the
Nearly every MTA out there has a - more or less compatible - sendmail
interface.
Regards, Olaf.
28406 ? S 0:00 /usr/sbin/sendmail -i
> -FCronDaemon -odi -oem root
You may want to check with lsof which process is feeding STDIN of this
sendmail process.
lsof -p 28406
You'll see something like this:
sendmail 27413 lupe0r FIFO0,5 2637562 pipe
There
day, June 19, 2003 9:10 AM
Subject: odd process running /usr/sbin/sendmail -i -CronDaemon -odi -oem
root
> I have had some problems with attempted hacks on
> my box and posted here the last few days. So
> I've been checking the processing running on my
> box and I see this.
> PID T
t; 28406 ?S 0:00 /usr/sbin/sendmail -i
> -FCronDaemon -odi -oem root
>
> I have postfix installed, and I'm not sure if
> this is a normal thing, or else a rogue process,
> or just a cron job that got stuck. As around the
Nearly every MTA out there has a - more or les
I have had some problems with attempted hacks on
my box and posted here the last few days. So
I've been checking the processing running on my
box and I see this.
PID TTY STAT TIME COMMAND
28406 ?S 0:00 /usr/sbin/sendmail -i
-FCronDaemon -odi -oem root
I have po
28406 ? S 0:00 /usr/sbin/sendmail -i
> -FCronDaemon -odi -oem root
You may want to check with lsof which process is feeding STDIN of this
sendmail process.
lsof -p 28406
You'll see something like this:
sendmail 27413 lupe0r FIFO0,5 2637562 pipe
There
TED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:10 AM
Subject: odd process running /usr/sbin/sendmail -i -CronDaemon -odi -oem
root
> I have had some problems with attempted hacks on
> my box and posted here the last few days. So
> I've been checking the processing running on my
> box and
I have had some problems with attempted hacks on
my box and posted here the last few days. So
I've been checking the processing running on my
box and I see this.
PID TTY STAT TIME COMMAND
28406 ?S 0:00 /usr/sbin/sendmail -i
-FCronDaemon -odi -oem root
I have po
Hy,
please consider that amavis and mailscanner are completly different mail
scanners. AFAIK: There is no standard debian package containing amavis
for sendmail, only for postfix.
The error messages in Your log are generated, by mailscanner. I would
say that Your mailscanner expects an other
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 14 April 2003 21:31, Répási Tibor wrote:
> Hy,
>
> just follow the steps described in /usr/share/sendmail/examples/amavis
> download the lates sources and it works. I've installed it a few weeks
> ago and it is runnin
> Hello!
>
> I know this is not specially a security topic, but I need to
> do this for
> My security :))
> I'm using sendmail, and I want to use mailscanner and
> spamassassin with
> it. I don't know how to configure sendmail to work with
> mailscanner.
Hy,
just follow the steps described in /usr/share/sendmail/examples/amavis
download the lates sources and it works. I've installed it a few weeks
ago and it is running well. I'm using it with f-prot, but You can config
it for any antivir software You want.
Regards,
Hello!
I know this is not specially a security topic, but I need to do this for
My security :))
I'm using sendmail, and I want to use mailscanner and spamassassin with
it. I don't know how to configure sendmail to work with mailscanner. The
mailscanner's howtos are very outda
I updated mine using apt-get and didn't run into a problem. Everything
seems to be working correctly on my side.
From: Markus Wennrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Miek Gieben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: debian-security@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: updated sendmail package:
1 - 100 of 217 matches
Mail list logo
