PATCH: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Wietse Venema
Ralf Hildebrandt: > > It is also possible that the Exim version in question is out of date, > > I recall seeing various bug reports on the Exim-users list about the > > CHUNKING support in Exim, even some security issues. Don't know whether > > the same symptoms are to be expected from a

Re: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
> It is also possible that the Exim version in question is out of date, > I recall seeing various bug reports on the Exim-users list about the > CHUNKING support in Exim, even some security issues. Don't know whether > the same symptoms are to be expected from a fully-patched version. According

Re: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
> On Sep 3, 2018, at 10:45 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > 2) Exim sends BDAT after RCPT is rejected. That is a protocol error. > There is no pipelining error, because Exim did not pipeline BDAT > after RCPT. postscreen did not log "command pipelining after RCPT". It is perhaps possible that

Re: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Wietse Venema
Viktor Dukhovni: > > > > On Sep 3, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > > I have difficuty parsing your suggestion that postsccreen should > > not consider this a pipelinig violation. > > > > The client pipelines commands, postscreen does not announce > > pipelining, therefore the

Re: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
> On Sep 3, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > I have difficuty parsing your suggestion that postsccreen should > not consider this a pipelinig violation. > > The client pipelines commands, postscreen does not announce > pipelining, therefore the client is at fault. Perhaps I was

Re: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Wietse Venema
Viktor Dukhovni: > /* > * smtpd(8) incompatibility: postscreen(8) drops the connection, instead > * of reading the entire BDAT chunk and staying in sync with the client. > * Justification: postscreen(8) should never see BDAT from a legitimate > * client, because 1) the

Re: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
* Wietse Venema : > Ralf Hildebrandt: > > Today a fellow postmaster (using Exim) called me, they were having problems > > sending > > mail to charite.de. In my log I found: > > > > Sep 3 00:31:18 mail-cbf postfix/postscreen[34943]: CONNECT from > > [31.7.179.105]:38256 to [193.175.73.208]:25 >

Re: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Wietse Venema
Ralf Hildebrandt: > Today a fellow postmaster (using Exim) called me, they were having problems > sending > mail to charite.de. In my log I found: > > Sep 3 00:31:18 mail-cbf postfix/postscreen[34943]: CONNECT from > [31.7.179.105]:38256 to [193.175.73.208]:25 > Sep 3 00:31:24 mail-cbf

Re: Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
> On Sep 3, 2018, at 8:41 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > > Today a fellow postmaster (using Exim) called me, they were having problems > sending > mail to charite.de. In my log I found: > > Sep 3 00:31:18 mail-cbf postfix/postscreen[34943]: CONNECT from > [31.7.179.105]:38256 to

Postscreen vs. BDAT

2018-09-03 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
Today a fellow postmaster (using Exim) called me, they were having problems sending mail to charite.de. In my log I found: Sep 3 00:31:18 mail-cbf postfix/postscreen[34943]: CONNECT from [31.7.179.105]:38256 to [193.175.73.208]:25 Sep 3 00:31:24 mail-cbf postfix/tlsproxy[39995]: CONNECT from