>that using TLS seemed so much cooler. I haven't tried the "Authenticated"
>SMTP patches, I get the feeling that those methods aren't really standards
>drivin. (anyone?) So that being said ...
they are :) SMTP AUTH is documented in ESMTP RFC (forgot the number).
Kris
aying and we
can not just allow certain IP's as few of our customers are using IPass or
public dialups here.
If opensmtp is not suitable for us then could you poing me to any alternative?
Krzysztof Dabrowski
At 11:14 99-05-21 -0400, you wrote:
>I am using Russel Nelson's POP3 before SMTP very successfully here on a
>single server handling > 10,000 users. I had to modify it slightly
>though. My tcprules update code makes sure that I have not already got a
>rule that covers the new IP before adding
comparing to qmail1.03 ? Will the configuration
files differ?
4. Is there a web page cointaing some information about it?
It would be nice if Dan could write a bit about it. If he's too busy then
maybe someone well informed could tell me more.
Krzysztof Dabrowski
.
Ofcourse only if you like it.
The software's home page is:
http://www.elysium.pl/members/brush/php-ezmlm/index.html
I'm looking forward for your feedback.
Krzysztof Dabrowski
is:
http://www.elysium.pl/members/brush/php-ezmlm/index.html
I'm looking forward for your feedback.
Krzysztof Dabrowski
> > >Our current server spec is a PIII 400, 256M, but we'll replace it with a
> > >high spec server if/when needed.
> >
> > Of course the number of users only provides a vague hint as to the likely
> > load. 10,000 corporate users typically hit a mail system a lot hard then
> > 10,000 freem
At 14:00 99-03-02 +, Russell Nelson wrote:
>Anand Buddhdev writes:
> > Sorry for being off-topic, but I have a small crisis on my
hands. I've just
> > been handed the administration of a machine, and its /var/mail
containing
> > mbox files is 100% full. qpopper is unable to make temporary
drop
Hello.
We are in the planing stage of a 500.000+ users mailserver (pop & smtp
only, no shell's or anything).
During our brainstorm we've came to few questions:
We assume that every account will run on the same UID (to break 65k uid's
limit).
a) how can we arrange an universal group-quota in thi
>My question is, will there be any implications "Out_There" of suddenly
>having a new IP and hostname for our mailserver, assuming we make the
>appro DNS changes?
Maybe you could arrange it on your router via port forwarding? You set it
up to forward all conenction for ports 25 i 110 to first mac
Hello.
We are using qmail here for a 8 months now and we are very satisfied with
it. As we don't switch to maildir right now (it has to wait a bit because
we've got few custom tools that needs to be converted).
So i have evaluated the available pop clients.
Standard Redhat poper (comes with imap
Is there an easy way to convert ezmlm's archive dirs into a standard
mailbox (so i can parse it with mailbox -> html converters)?
Kris
At 22:56 99-03-29 -1000, Greg wrote:
>
>the script qmail-pop3d.init exists in the same place
>as qmail-smtpd.init and qmail.init, but it doesn't start on
>boot-up? I'm beginning to dislike the way RH "hides" stuff ;(
>please have I missed something?
Redhat doesn't hide anything.
first cat your /
>I am trying to set up qmail-smtpd so that it requires a password. This is
>supported by many e-mail clients.
>
>I have already successfully setup tcprules so that only specific IPs are
>allowed in, but I would rather have it let any IP in and be password based
>so that when I travel I can use my
At 09:19 2000-03-15 -0600, Reuben King wrote:
>All my users use Outlook 2000 and Outlook Express 5... Both of which
>support SMTP authentication. Is there a good implementation of this for
>Qmail? It would strike me (as an ignorant newbie) as a better alternative
>to relay control than tcpserve
At 10:33 2000-03-21 -0600, you wrote:
>I'm having trouble getting this patch to work with $M outlook express or the
>2000 client. When I turn on smtp auth on in these clients - it just prompts
>me for a user name and password over and over again - same thing with
>Netscape.
The problem is that b
>The page mentions that Outlook 97 doesn't work what about others?
Outlook'97 does not have support for smtp-auth at all.
'98 supports it. exactly like outlook express.
Kris
http://members.elysium.pl/brush/qmail-smtpd-auth/
Kris
>Do not, EVER, do that. The moment you do, checkpassword becomes a /bin/su
>replacement without any logging or limiting.
Don't you think that this histeric reaction is a bit too far?
checkpassword is certainly safer suid program that most of suids in your
system.
And another one:
>Don't do t
Hello..
New version of qmail-stmpd-auth patch is available at:
http://members.elysium.pl/brush/qmail-smtpd-auth/
It fixes a nasty problem with cram-md5 auth. It worked perfectly for me for
2 months and i've found the bug only recently.
Brush
>It's as simple as that.
so we finally need a good , versatile solution for it. Because a lot of
users have problems with it and not everyone wants to go ahead and patch
his way through qmail-smtpd.
Brush
>I'm not completely sure how the authenticated SMTP conversation
>looks like. You have two possible approaches:
>
>1. qmail-popup like. You start SMTP conversation as a root, grab a
>username/password, verify it, drop root and go on. (That's what
>qmail-popup -> checkpassword -> qmail-pop3d seque
At 09:54 2000-06-05 +, Nguyen Hong Son wrote:
>Dear All
>Does someone show me a patch for authentication to SMTP services in qmail ?
http://members.elysium.pl/brush/qmail-smtpd-auth/index.html
K.
>% patch < /usr/local/SRC/SMTPAUTH/qmail-smtpd-auth-0.24/qmail-smtpd.patch
> Looks like a new-style context diff.
>Hunk #3 failed at line 25.
>Hunk #5 failed at line 101.
>Hunk #6 failed at line 116.
>Hunk #8 failed at line 229.
>Hunk #10 failed at line 369.
>Hunk #11 failed at line 377.
>Hunk
At 08:22 2000-06-19 +0200, Goran Blazic wrote:
>Has anyone tried patching qmail with qmail-smtpd-auth and Iain Patterson's
>MySQL+QMAIL patch?
>I plan on doing this and would like to know in advance whether I can expect
>trouble... :-)
>
>Thanks in advance, Goran
Send me the resulting patch or su
As in subject.
Changes in this release:
- changed the error message when problems with starting checkpassword
occour. This was a big source of question ("out of memory") that i receive
in my e-mail.
- Joerg Strohmayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] showed me light in the dark. I've read
the SMTP AUTH RFC
Hello..
A new, updated version of cmd5checkpw (needed for cram-md5 authentication
in qmail-smtp auth patch) is released.
Changes:
- fix for a crash when user is not found in the passwd database.
- Support for PLAIN/LOGIN auth (so you can use cmd5checkpw for both CRAM-MD5
and PLAIN/LOGIN). Chan
Hello,
A new version of qmail-smtpd-auth patch has been released.
Changes:
- security fix - if your checkpassword crashed, attacker would get the relay
permission. Now it should work.
You can download it from the usual place:
http://members.elysium.pl/brush/qmail-smtpd-auth/
NOTICE: this pro
At 18:41 2000-10-17 +0200, Olivier M. wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 11:44:39AM +0200, Krzysztof Dabrowski wrote:
> > Hello,
> > A new version of qmail-smtpd-auth patch has been released.
> > http://members.elysium.pl/brush/qmail-smtpd-auth/
>
>looks nice. Do you
Danny,, here is an excerpt from you docs:
10.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
and allows me to relay when I dial up, but only if I authenticate
first, via the rule:
=.dialup.someisp.net:allow,RBLSMTPD="",REQUIREAUTH=""
What is the ADDED functionality of your patch? Just ot make it clear to
me.
1. if yo
Hello.
I'm proud to announce a new version of qmail-smtpd-auth patch. We have
merged our effors with
Eric M. Johnston so now there is again only one qmail-smtpd-auth patch.
We have also set up a mailing list, which is available on
http://list.elysium.pl/mailman/listinfo/smtpauth .
Subscribe the
s list and remove all spam from queue. It's not perfect but it
helps when all you need is to have your server up and running.
Also blocking spammers IP (or entire C subnet :) ) via tcprules in
tcpserver is a good idea if you can't close your relay.
Hope that helps.
Krzysztof Dabrowski
Polska OnLine
Hello..
As i can see my post provoked few interesting answers. At the moment
everything looks like that hypotetical 500.000+ mailserver could be
implemented. There are just few remaining questions. If someone knows the
answers then please share them :)
a) how one can organize an independent quot
>This conversation is making me yearn for reposts of FAQ 5.4. I don't
>use Linux. I don't use Redhat - these conversations have made it even
>more clear to me that I never want to use Linux or Redhat.
What EXACTLY prevent you from installing qmail on Linux? Nothing i guess.
> Why would
>anyone w
At 22:05 98-12-22 , Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
>On 22-Dec-98 Sam wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> > Unless you knew in advance that things have been relocated, you'd find
>>> > everything where you normally expect them to be.
>>>
>>> Yep. Nothin better than an ins
>stuff like 'Red Hat doing fine with qmail, 16MB 486/66, 7 messages a
keep in mind that 7 messages/day is less than 1 message/second. and
this is nothing special at all. On out peak hours we've few messages/second
and out processor usage is someting like 0.7 on p2 266.
K.
If you like some suggetsions then you can make a switch that will prevent
your script from checking in a local or virtualdomain is in rcpthosts. We
are using RELAYCLIENT in tcpserver so rcpthosts are not neede and your
script is making too much noise.
Not that i can't grep it out but you can make
At 20:25 99-05-05 , Russell Steffen wrote:
>
>
>You can choose sendmail during a fresh install. However, when you do the
>updgrade from a previous version, sendmail is forcibly installed and there
>is no obvious way to turn that off.
>
>Russ
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you haven't done "rpm -e sendmail
>Right, and if someone changes the software, that person takes on the
>support nightmare. Dan could quite reasonably say "I will only help
>you if you are using an unpatched qmail."
>
> > Dan doesn't want to be ``faced with a support nightmare---forever'', and
> > I can't say I blame him.
>
>T
>relaying. What control mechanism are you using? SMTP after POP is pretty
>easy, and I think there's stuff already on the qmail web site implementing
>it.
There is atleast one smtp client from redmond that never does POP before
SMTP if there is something to send prefering to do POP after SMTP
At 19:09 2000-01-22 , Guan Yang wrote:
>listy-dyskusyjne Krzysztof Dabrowski wrote:
> > Actualy i'll be paid to enhance the SMTP AUTH patch to support more
> > authentication types so you can expect it next month if time permits.
>
>I thought the SMTP AUTH patch used c
At 20:29 2000-01-22 , Sam wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Jan 2000, listy-dyskusyjne Krzysztof Dabrowski wrote:
>
> > Actualy i'll be paid to enhance the SMTP AUTH patch to support more
> > authentication types so you can expect it next month if time permits.
>
>I'm curio
> Mrs. Brisby has written a user/password based authentication
> mechanism for qmail-smtpd. This lets your microsoft's outlook
> express supports (outgoing mail server user name) and netscape
> 4.5 (and above-betas) users securely roam. Users can use a
> slightly modified
Hello..
I've took mr. Brisby's patch and i'm enhancing it now.
At the moment i have implemented the PLAIN AUTH type and i'm in the middle
of CRAM-MD5.
When we'll have these 3, i can assume that most client will be able to use
this feature.
I need some beta testers so if you are interested then
Hello.
I have finished my smtp-auth patch for qmail. First betatesters has got it
2 days ago.
I hope that i didn't screw up anything this weekend (i have modified it a
bit without testing in real world) ,
but hey! - release early, release often!
I've updated mr. Brisby's patch to work with 2 m
Hello,
Please, please forgive me, but yesterday's version of my SMTP AUTH patch
does not work. It was my mistake during "securing" it a bit and it went out
unchecked. Grab the latest version from:
http://www.elysium.pl/members/brush/qmail-smtpd-auth/
I have checked it with Eudora 4.2.2 few mi
>Anyone know how to manually generate the proper response?
Take my cram md5 checkpassword and modify it a bit. Keyed md5 routines are
there.
http://www.elysium.pl/members/brush/cmd5checkpw
Kris
>I applied the TLS patch, then the auth patch, which required some
>handwork. If you can't figure it out, I can send you some diffs.
>
>-Dave
Dave.. if you can, then send this patch to me so i can add it to my
webpage. Maybe it'll be helpfull for others too.
Kris
>Thanx.
>To solve this problem we are going to run two queues and only share the
>users directories.
>This sound good for you ??
>
>Thomas
Would you be so kind and share with us your experience with qmail + coda?
I'm investigating this possibility too and i would like to know how good it
is (c
At 20:06 2000-05-03, Russell Nelson wrote:
>Is anyone using Krzysztof Dabrowski's cmd5checkpw with qmail-pop3d?
>Yes, I know that he didn't write it for that, he wrote it for
>smtp-auth. But it looks to me like he's reversed the password and the
>timestamp parameters to checkpassword.
;)
Isn't i
At 21:12 2000-05-16, you wrote:
Has anyone tried installing the
smtp-auth qmail patch after installing the amavis ant-virus
wrapper? I tried and was no longer able to send or receive
mail. I had to re-install the qmail binaries and then re-install
amavis. Any help or knowledge would be
apprecia
>The 3.x series has been having *tons* of security problems, including
>stuff that was previously fixed in 2.x. I really don't trust it.
There is realy no point in using qpopper. I have used it in isp enviroment
and i can say that it sucks.
It doesn't do any mailbox locking, it just copies the
>I did have a problem with patching qmail-smtpd (I got a warning about a
>return type, see earlier e-mail on list) but I'm not sure if that's the
>problem.
>/etc/shadow is owned by user/group root.
the roots of your (and 90% of other people's problems) are 2
a) either your qmail-smtpd is not ab
53 matches
Mail list logo
