Marlon Klee wrote: > It's not a "Flaw" in Spamdyke, because the People that uses Qmail but > not Spamdyke > had the same kind of problems, you can check on the qmr forum and see > that was not > a Spamdyke Problem.
It's definitely a flaw in the spamdyke's tls handling. No doubt about it. qmail-smtpd (including Frederik Vermulen's TLS patch) has proper timeout handling in place and I've never experienced hangs like the ones discussed in this thread. My observations are based on both looking at the code and running more than 200 qmail instances. > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Michael Colvin <mcol...@norcalisp.com > <mailto:mcol...@norcalisp.com>> wrote: > > As a side note on this thread... > > I've not applied the patch on my boxes yes, just haven't had the > time. I've > just run the script that was provided every couple days, and that > cleared > the hung process. > > However, I have noticed something interesting. I used to have to run it > every couple days. Since this patch came out, I'm not having any hung > processes, or very few. I'm looking at MRTG graphs of SMTP > processes, which > use to grow pretty regularly, but over the last two weeks, they've > stopped. > > It makes me wonder if this wasn't either something the spammers had > figured > out was a "Flaw" in Spamdyke, and were exploiting it, or if whoever was > doing it simply got banned/dropped, or got a life. > > Anyway, I'll apply the patch when I get a chance, just thought it was > interesting that the "Need" for the patch seems to have passed.... > > > Michael J. Colvin > NorCal Internet Services > www.norcalisp.com <http://www.norcalisp.com> > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: spamdyke-users-boun...@spamdyke.org > <mailto:spamdyke-users-boun...@spamdyke.org> [mailto:spamdyke-users- > <mailto:spamdyke-users-> > > boun...@spamdyke.org <mailto:boun...@spamdyke.org>] On Behalf Of > Hartmut Wernisch > > Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 7:09 AM > > To: spamdyke users > > Subject: Re: [spamdyke-users] [patch01] TLS hung processes > > > > On 22 Mar 10, Mirko Buffoni wrote: > > > At 13.10 19/03/2010 +0100, you wrote: > > > >At 13.39 19/03/2010 +1100, you wrote: > > > > >On 19/03/2010 07:15, t...@uncon.org <mailto:t...@uncon.org> > wrote: > > > > > > Started a new thread for this improved patch. This should > fix the > > > > > > SSL_accept, SSL_shutdown and SSL_read issues. It > temporarily sets > > the > > > > > > socket to non-blocking and timesout after the configured time. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a replacement for the previous patch, apply to a clean > > > > > > spamdyke-4.0.10 code base. -- Teodor Milkov ICDSoft Ltd. System Administrator http://www.icdsoft.com/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
