Russ Allbery([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.04.29 14:49:03 +:
> q question <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> > Qmail is extremely network unfriendly and generates denial of service
> > attacks on other mailservers in its enthusiasm to deliver as many
> > messages as possible in a short period of ti
I appreciate your pointing this out.
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John R. Levine)
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Is qmail "best reserved for mailing list server purposes
>only"?
>Date: 30 Apr 2001 19:15:38 -0400
>
> >One last not
Oleg Polyakov wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how qmail works if you are sending 100 messages
> from server to another one.
> Does it open 100 connections concurrently?
it opens "maxconcurrency" connections. It doesn't have per-site
concurrency limit, unles you patch it. It is reccommended, if
you ar
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Rather, it tries to bounce them and the bounce bounces as undeliverable.
> The solution is for ORBS to stop probing systems from which no spam has
> ever been sent and for which there is no reason to suspect a lack of
> security.
they were a lot easier to igore when they
--- "John R. Levine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Qmail backs off very well, but doesn't work all that well with
> sendmail under heavy load. The problem is that sendmail keeps
> accepting connections even when it doesn't have enough system
> resources to accept mail, and tends to thrash to dea
>One last note on this thread. While rereading the FAQ, I came across this
>which indicates qmail has brakes to keep from generating denial of service
>attacks.
>
>http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/efficiency.html
>
>Does qmail back off from dead hosts?
>Answer: Yes. qmail has three backoff features: ..
One last note on this thread. While rereading the FAQ, I came across this
which indicates qmail has brakes to keep from generating denial of service
attacks.
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/efficiency.html
Does qmail back off from dead hosts?
Answer: Yes. qmail has three backoff features:
Each mess
Hi Russ, John, and Jason,
I appreciate your taking the time to respond to my question about the ORBS
opinion. I felt I should check it out before installing qmail and
unexpectedly becoming an infamous generator of denial of service attacks!
Russ, I appreciated hearing some of the background is
> "Qmail admins: Qmail's current version is secure by default, but earlier
> versions were insecure. Most admins know enough to follow the instructions
> for securing it before putting qmail into service, however it usually
drops
> ORBS test messages checking for UUCP pathing vulnerabilities - "!
From: q question <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Qmail is
> extremely network unfriendly and generates denial of service attacks on
> other mailservers in its enthusiasm to deliver as many messages as
possible
> in a short period of time. For this reason it is best reserved for mailing
> list server purpose
q question <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One of the reasons I was interested in qmail was the security aspect of
> it. I've been impressed that noone has won the reward that is available
> from Dan Bernstein. This is probably the most negative comment I have
> seen about qmail while surfing for i
One of the reasons I was interested in qmail was the security aspect of it.
I've been impressed that noone has won the reward that is available from Dan
Bernstein. This is probably the most negative comment I have seen about
qmail while surfing for info:
http://www.orbs.org/otherresources.html
12 matches
Mail list logo
