On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 09:25:12AM -0400, martin wrote:
Replying to myself...sigh.
I left out 'mailing list'. Obviously there are mentions of ucspi-tcp.
Well, there's no compulsion of the author to do so, now is there?
When I've had a question about any of the ucspi-tcp tools, a Google
I left out 'mailing list'. Obviously there are mentions of
ucspi-tcp.
Well, there's no compulsion of the author to do so, now is there?
When I've had a question about any of the ucspi-tcp tools, a Google
search pretty quickly exposes any number of citations on any number
Hello.
I have noted again that there is no ucspi-tcp mailing list. I have also
searched the qmail mailing list for a previous mention of ucspi-tcp to no
avail. Further, whereas
http://cr.yp.to/lists.html
has a mention for qmailanalog, dot-forward fastforward under the qmail
mailing list
Replying to myself...sigh.
I left out 'mailing list'. Obviously there are mentions of ucspi-tcp.
At 09:02 AM 8/7/2001 -0400, you wrote:
Hello.
I have noted again that there is no ucspi-tcp mailing list. I have also
searched the qmail mailing list for a previous mention of ucspi-tcp
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 11:45:00AM -0400, Jeff Hill wrote:
When we e-mail a newsletter to our user list (10,000+ e-mail, twice a
month), it holds up any other e-mail going into the send queue. What's
the best way to avoid this?
This question has been asked and answered less than a week ago.
On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 05:56:46PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 11:45:00AM -0400, Jeff Hill wrote:
When we e-mail a newsletter to our user list (10,000+ e-mail, twice a
month), it holds up any other e-mail going into the send queue. What's
the best way to avoid
When we e-mail a newsletter to our user list (10,000+ e-mail, twice a
month), it holds up any other e-mail going into the send queue. What's
the best way to avoid this?
The mail to the user list is not time-sensitive; it could take a day to
trickle out and it wouldn't matter. But the few e-mail
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 08:53:15PM -0400, Jeff Palmer wrote:
Maybe we should make this list moderated? I for one would volunteer to
help moderate the list.
Second idea Maybe the list maintainer should implement qmail-scanner or
some other virus scanner in the list, so that infected
Maybe we should make this list moderated? I for one would volunteer to
help moderate the list.
Second idea Maybe the list maintainer should implement qmail-scanner or
some other virus scanner in the list, so that infected mails couldn't
get into the list, eliminating a million VIRUS
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 09:52:03AM +0530, Sandeep Goel wrote:
How can we implement mailing list in qmail-ldap
a) read http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ldap/, there's a whole section about that
b) use the correct list, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
* Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de
How can we implement mailing list in qmail-ldap
Hi,
I am sorry, can you tell me how to unsuscribe this
mailing list. I have tried to find instruction but I have not found
a way to do it.
Thanks a lot,
Hoang
ed lim([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.05.09 11:28:16 +:
Hi,
I need a mailing list to send to our millions of subscribers... I am already
using ezmlm but I'm still open for suggestions on a much simpler or better one.
ezmlm-idx with mysql support and the subscriber lists in a database
* Karsten W Rohrbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ed lim([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.05.09 11:28:16 +:
I need a mailing list to send to our millions of subscribers... I am
already using ezmlm but I'm still open for suggestions on a much
simpler or better one.
ezmlm-idx with mysql support
Hi,
I need a mailing list to send to
our millions of subscribers... I am already using ezmlm but I'm still open for
suggestions on a much simpler or better one.
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 11:28:16AM -0700, ed lim wrote:
Hi,
I need a mailing list to send to our millions of subscribers... I am already
using ezmlm but I'm still open for suggestions on a much simpler or better one.
Any specifics on what constitutes simpler or better?
You'll be hard
ed lim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I need a mailing list to send to our millions of subscribers... I am already
using ezmlm but I'm still open for suggestions on a much simpler or better
one.
You're unlikely to get any suggestions here; most of the people in this list
who use mailing list
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 time.
for this mailing
list account... we want it to use the standard ezmlm .qmail file instead.
However when I add:
=vcpphelp:vcpphelp:501:501:/home/vcpphelp:-::
+vcpphelp-:vcpphelp:501:501:/home/vcpphelp:-::
to /var/qmail/users/assign qmail reports in the error logs:
May 3 01:06:56 dev qmail: 988866416.131424
-Original Message-
From: David Coley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 1:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Using /users assign file with mailing list
I have a small problem with one of our accounts. We have a user account set
up for one of our mailing lists (/home/vcpphelp
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 note on this thread. While rereading the FAQ, I came
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: ...
--- 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 death.
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
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 are
as possible
in a short period of time. For this reason it is best reserved for mailing
list server purposes only.
Do you all agree with this opinion that qmail is best reserved for mailing
list server purposes only?
_
Get your FREE download
list server purposes
only.
Do you all agree with this opinion that qmail is best reserved for
mailing list server purposes only?
No.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
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 purposes only
as
possible
in a short period of time. For this reason it is best reserved for mailing
list server purposes only.
At the top of that page it says:
'Everything on this page is based on information supplied to ORBS by server
admins and MTA authors. Opinions are just that - opinions.'
Wow, server admins
a mailing list server? It seems to me that it would be especially
UNsuitable for that task.
Jason, I agree with you that there is no real distinction between list
subscribers and regular mail recipients. You can get an equally high volume
either way, and not all lists restrict the members
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
Could someone recommend me a good mailing list software that works fine with
qmail and has a web based admin interface?
First I thought about mailman but after reading it's README.QMAIL I am a bit
in doubt, as it seems to have so many issues regarding Qmail.
Regards,
Peter
* Peter Peltonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010423 04:43]:
Could someone recommend me a good mailing list software that works fine with
qmail and has a web based admin interface?
You'vegot to be kidding. http://ezmlm.org/ and
http://cr.yp.to/ezmlm.html
First I thought about mailman but after
www.ezmlm.org
Peter == Peter Peltonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could someone recommend me a good mailing list software that works fine with
qmail and has a web based admin interface?
First I thought about mailman but after reading it's README.QMAIL I am a bit
in doubt, as it seems
I would like to unsubscribe to this mailing list and not having any luck.
Could someone please advise, thanks in advance.
Mark Delany wrote:
On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 11:49:08PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hey guys,
lets make this poor man happy and let us all tell him about how well
qmail/ezmlm works!
This guy is Elias Levy (aleph1) and he runs the Bugtraq mailing list.
Please send an email
Andre Oppermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mark Delany wrote:
[ ... ]
Elias also talks about an emulation layer for LISTSERV. I've not heard
of anyone providing that for ezmlm.
I don't know if there is any mailing list software out there having
an emulation layer for LISTSERV... Worst
Hey guys,
lets make this poor man happy and let us all tell him about how well
qmail/ezmlm works!
This guy is Elias Levy (aleph1) and he runs the Bugtraq mailing list.
Please send an email directly to him if you want to suggest qmail/ezmlm
for running a large mailing list with a secure piece
On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 11:49:08PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hey guys,
lets make this poor man happy and let us all tell him about how well
qmail/ezmlm works!
This guy is Elias Levy (aleph1) and he runs the Bugtraq mailing list.
Please send an email directly to him if you want
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do have one problem with receiving mail from any mailing list. It simply
bounces!! Not sure where to look on this one. The setup here is qmail
configured as an SMTP gateway for an entire domain, pullmail running on NT to
inject mail from gateway
Thanks to the list, I've built my first SMTP server So far things
are looking good. I do have one problem with receiving mail from any
mailing list. It simply bounces!! Not sure where to look on this one.
The setup here is qmail configured as an SMTP gateway for an entire
domain
It seems that someone's mail server re-injecting messages to this
mailing list. I just got another copy of a message that I sent
yesterday. Has anyone else noticed this? The headers are included and
what I have seen is that the Message-id has changed maybe to the mail
server that is re
how can i remove the autoresponder and mailing list
from the qmailadmin? i am using the latest version of
qmailadmin?
and, how can i login using username instead of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] in sqwebmail?
rgds,
yee
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy
PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 11:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: remove autoresponder and mailing list from qmailadmin
how can i remove the autoresponder and mailing list
from the qmailadmin? i am using the latest version of
qmailadmin?
and, how can i login using username instead
* Sashka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
how can I make mailing list private in ezml?
By reading the ezmlm(-idx)-FAQ and looking for moderation.
also, I need to add Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Look for headeradd.
how to do these things?
You do not do the latter *AT ALL*:
http
Hello,
Saturday, February 17, 2001, 12:25:02 PM, you wrote:
RSS * Sashka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
how can I make mailing list private in ezml?
RSS By reading the ezmlm(-idx)-FAQ and looking for moderation.
also, I need to add Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RSS Look for headeradd.
how to do
Hello,
how can I make mailing list private in ezml? All i need, is 4
persons to be able to send and receive e-mail from that mailing
list. also, I need to add Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
how to do these things?
thanks.
--
Sashka
.
Does qmail Mailing List have the ability for me to do the same thing if I
set up lists for the five newsletters? The documentation the ISP provided
me doesn't show this information. Thanks.
Larry McJunkin
www.wugnet.com
to these newsletters that interfaces with Lyris.
Does qmail Mailing List have the ability for me to do the same thing if I
set up lists for the five newsletters? The documentation the ISP provided
me doesn't show this information. Thanks.
qmail is just an MTA. Is the new ISP running ezmlm
, this seems avoidable.
I myself have never used Postfix, but have used Qmail.
I've used both and would not mind using one over the other, but...
My general sense:
* Qmail apprently has slightly better performance for mailing list
stuff, Postfix has slightly more performance for indivudal
This is just for a bit of fun...if you're not interested in this
posting (in all your lack of humour), please add it to your killfile
or equivalent.
Does anyone here have any funny recollections of people sending
postings that were meant to go to someone totally unrelated to the
mailing list
is
Listar.
I'm looking into MTAs; from the various mailing list archives I've read on
the web, it seems that qmail and postfix are the top MTAs. I could not
find information to tell me which one would work better for my situation,
however.
Can someone tell me: Should I use qmail or postfix to run
for mailing list
stuff, Postfix has slightly more performance for indivudal mailboxes.
* Postfix is more open-source than Qmail
* Postfix is easier to configure than Qmail
* Qmail is more flexible than Postfix
You will be happy with whatever choice you make.
And oh, I would up your RAM to 128 megs
I have been having trouble when trying to send out emails to mailing lists
in qmail. The local users get teh email fine but the mailing list gets the
error I show below. I have all of the permissions correct (as you can see
below) and I have recompiled qmail several times. Please email me
* "James R. Clark II" [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010117 22:09]:
I have been having trouble when trying to send out emails to mailing lists
in qmail. The local users get teh email fine but the mailing list gets the
error I show below. I have all of the permissions correct (as you can see
be
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 04:09:19PM -0500, James R. Clark II wrote:
I have been having trouble when trying to send out emails to mailing lists
in qmail. The local users get teh email fine but the mailing list gets the
error I show below. I have all of the permissions correct (as you can see
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 04:59:19PM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
who knows how can I edit ezmlm mailing-list by text editor?
I'm using qmail with ezmlm-0.53.
as a root or owner of mailinglist
(of course , except auto-subscribing)
how can I add so many mail address by text editor
who knows how can I edit ezmlm mailing-list by text
editor?
I'm using qmail with ezmlm-0.53.
as a root or owner of mailinglist
(of course , except auto-subscribing)
how canI add so many mail address by text
editor?
please help me
On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 07:15:27AM +0100, Cyril Bitterich wrote:
I second that.
We are now at 114 messages about that one subject on this little list
What is so funny is that one of the people who was at the heart of this gave a
reason of haveing to pay for each message download. Well at
What is so funny is that one of the people who was at the heart of this gave a
reason of haveing to pay for each message download. Well at least now I have
my $0.02 worth in :)
rofl, you pay for Traffic? You must have been from Yesterday! ;-))
Bah everyone has vented, yadda yadda
yadda...
nationality who cares, level of knowledge who
cares, qmail i care
let's get back to qmail
:
rick
heh sorry for the html post and thanks Jamin
Collins :
rick
I second that.
We are now at 114 messages about that one subject on this little list
with it's
IRONIE few /IRONIE subscribers.
I'd say at the point we reached 100 it was far over the limit.
So please please all of you STOP IT.
You all have the e-mail adresses of the people involved, so if
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 07:46:08AM -, John Conover wrote:
Its not exactly a qmail question, but does anyone know how many email
addresses are on the world's largest mailing list, and the OS/HW/MTA
it runs on? Average messages per day?
What do you mean by the world's largest? Most
Its not exactly a qmail question, but does anyone know how many email
addresses are on the world's largest mailing list, and the OS/HW/MTA
it runs on? Average messages per day?
Thanks,
John
--
John ConoverTel. 408.370.2688 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
631 Lamont Ct. Cel
I created a mailing list for discussions about my planned init system,
minit (the name is not final yet. Maybe someone comes up with a better
one?).
So, if you were waiting for a place to voice your wishes for a small yet
feature-complete init system, please send an empty email to
[EMAIL
Hi all.
I'm searching a very good mailing-list manager for qmail.
Can you tell me the name and home site?
Thanks.
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 11:32:48AM +0200, Linux wrote:
Hi all.
I'm searching a very good mailing-list manager for qmail.
Can you tell me the name and home site?
ezmlm (http://cr.yp.to/ezmlm.html I think).
www.emzlm.org is also quite complete :)
Greetz, Peter
--
dataloss networks
'/ignore
I'm searching a very good mailing-list manager for qmail.
Look at the qmail website under "related packages". There is ezmlm
mentioned.
Regards, Frank
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 11:55:58AM +0200, Frank Tegtmeyer wrote:
I'm searching a very good mailing-list manager for qmail.
Look at the qmail website under "related packages". There is ezmlm
mentioned.
You may want to look at ezmlm-idx right away.
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
-Original Message-
From: Mike Glover [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I always thought that the red flag on the mailbox meant that there
was mail to be picked up...
That refers to the little-known (and hard to achieve accidentally) "double
down" position that means "No transport provider
Sam Carleton wrote:
Can someone enlighten me as to how to remove myself from this mailing
list?
I don't know myself, but I know a guy that does. His email address
is [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Drop him a line, and I'm sure he'll
be happy to help you...
Good luck,
Eric
If you are able to get off the damn thing let me know. I have tried
multiiple times to get off and it has confirmed that I was removed, but
the mails just keep on coming.
Kris
Kris... It has been said before... Look at your headers. Mine have this on
them:
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
^
which means I am subscribed as "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", and will have to
unsubscribe using that particular mail address. And I mean use
Can someone enlighten me as to how to remove myself from this mailing
list?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sam Carleton
Can someone enlighten me as to how to remove myself from this mailing
list?
Some mailing lists provide unsubscribe information in each message, others
in a "Welcome message" at th
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sam Carleton
Can someone enlighten me as to how to remove myself from this mailing
list?
That said, going to www.qmail.org gives you a nice link to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
that tells all about
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Don Wright wrote:
This will
alert the mailman to not deliver the diskettes with the messages to the
"mailhost" not unlike the little red flag found on mailboxes.
I always thought that the red flag on the mailbox meant that there
was mail to be picked up...
-mike
--
Dave Sill wrote:
Jonathan McDowell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 12:49:18PM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
Right, so FETCHMAIL is trying to deduce the recipient based on the To:
header field. This is *not* going to work for list mail, spam, BCC's,
or any other message
Petre Rodan wrote:
Hi folks!
I have the following dilema:
peter is a user on my system. peter subscribes to this mailing list.
how can I make sure peter getts the messages from this list?
I ask this because the 'TO:' field doesn't point to the local user but
to [EMAIL PROTECTED
where fetchmail is sending them. You haven't
told us anything about how you're using fetchmail, so there's no way
we can tell you what to change.
I suggest you check the fetchmail man page, web site, mailing list,
etc. People here might be able to help, but it's not really the
appropriate channel
Hi folks!
So, this is my dilema:
When I receive mails from this mailing list the folowing message popps
up:
reading message 4 of 45 (2050 octets)
About to rewrite Return-Path:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rewritten version is Return-Path:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
About to rewrite To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Petre Rodan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I receive mails from this mailing list the folowing message popps
up:
reading message 4 of 45 (2050 octets)
About to rewrite Return-Path:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rewritten version is Return-Path:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
About to rewrite To: [EMAIL
Petre Rodan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I receive mails from this mailing list the folowing message popps
up:
reading message 4 of 45 (2050 octets)
About to rewrite Return-Path:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rewritten version is Return-Path:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
About to rewrite To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Jonathan McDowell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 12:49:18PM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
Right, so FETCHMAIL is trying to deduce the recipient based on the To:
header field. This is *not* going to work for list mail, spam, BCC's,
or any other message whose envelope recipients
Hi folks!
I have the following dilema:
peter is a user on my system. peter subscribes to this mailing list.
how can I make sure peter getts the messages from this list?
I ask this because the 'TO:' field doesn't point to the local user but
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The only place that peter's name
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 08:30:47AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
Motonori seems to have thought that the "smtp" service entry in
master.cf controlled outgoing concurrency, when, in fact, it controls
incoming concurrency.
I think still this is not correct. Actually there are two 'smtp', one
for
"P.Y. Adi Prasaja" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is your previous post:
He apparently confused incoming concurrency with outgoing
concurrency.
What are you trying to say in this regard?
Motonori seems to have thought that the "smtp" service entry in
master.cf controlled outgoing
"David Dyer-Bennet" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 4 August 2000 at 09:37:29 -0400
Eval 1 Eval 2 Eval 3
MTA timedns timedns timedns
qmail 155 1250 127 1230 127 1235
Postfix
"P.Y. Adi Prasaja" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 08:14:32AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
He apparently confused incoming concurrency with outgoing
concurrency. Luckily, Postfix defaults to 50, so the results are still
valid.
Then you wrong either :-)
No, I'm not wrong. If
On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 08:32:37PM -0600, Irwan Hadi wrote:
I saw, at least at evaluation 3, postfix beat qmail ;)
BTW, still don't know how about exact configuration that the author's
using while doing the experiments.
If this information could be gathered from:
Irwan Hadi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.kyoto.wide.ad.jp/mta/eval1/eindex.html
I saw, at least at evaluation 3, postfix beat qmail ;)
Check again. qmail won all three tests. In Evaluation 3, qmail
finished in ~125 seconds, and Postfix took over 150 seconds--next to
last place.
So
"P.Y. Adi Prasaja" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If this information could be gathered from:
http://www.kyoto.wide.ad.jp/mta/eval1/eoperation.html
then one can make a conclusion that the authors no nothing about
postfix. /etc/postfix/master.cf has nothing todo with concurrency
control in
On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 08:14:32AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
then one can make a conclusion that the authors no nothing about
postfix. /etc/postfix/master.cf has nothing todo with concurrency
control in postfix, at least if he think that it has the same fashion
as qmail.
He apparently
Fernando Almeida [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Irwan Hadi wrote:
At 08:45 PM 8/1/00 -0300, you wrote:
Im setting a mailing list system that will require a VERY good
performance. After search for a lot of options, Ive decided to use qmail
because I think it is the most quick
Ronny Haryanto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 02-Aug-2000, Dave Sill wrote:
I don't think it's quite as secure as qmail
Would you care to shed some light on why you don't think so?
Two reasons:
1) Postfix only uses a single uid. qmail uses six.
2) Wietse's code is buggier than Dan's. Check the
On 02-Aug-2000, Dave Sill wrote:
1) Postfix only uses a single uid. qmail uses six.
Why is using more than one uid better? What sort of security problem
would using one uid potentially pose?
2) Wietse's code is buggier than Dan's. Check the historical record.
(To be fair, *everyone's* code
The multiple UIDs provide a few failsafes, if nothing else, whereby one
broken / buggy / replaced binary can't do damage to files it doesn't own.
DJB has comments about this in the readmes, if I'm not mistaken.
- Original Message -
From: "Ronny Haryanto" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 2 August 2000 at 10:14:56 -0400
http://www.kyoto.wide.ad.jp/mta/eval1/
Just noticed that this is now available in English:
http://www.kyoto.wide.ad.jp/mta/eval1/eindex.html
His methodology looks reasonably sound, now that I can read the
Ronny Haryanto [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 2 August 2000 at 09:35:52 -0500
On 02-Aug-2000, Dave Sill wrote:
I don't think it's quite as secure as qmail
Would you care to shed some light on why you don't think so? Not to
ignite flames but for informational purposes. I use both qmail
1 - 100 of 205 matches
Mail list logo
