Hello blist,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 2:00:08 AM, you wrote:
b I am installing vchkpw + SMTP AUTH + qmail. I have installed qmail with
b this patch:
bqmail-smtpd-auth-0.31 from
b http://members.elysium.pl/brush/qmail-smtpd-auth/
b Here is my run tcpserver script for qmail-smtpd:
b exec
On Friday, May 21, 2004 5:41 AM, DEBO Jurgen E. G. wrote:
In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS
security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent Your
e-mailadress and Your password of Your mailbox over the internet.
Are you insinuating that this is
Hello Jeremy,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 3:47:18 PM, you wrote:
JK On Friday, May 21, 2004 5:41 AM, DEBO Jurgen E. G. wrote:
In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS
security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent Your
e-mailadress and Your password of
On Thursday 20 May 2004 09:24 pm, Brooks Roy wrote:
I have put in the patch as described in the contrib README and changed
it to be /bin/checkpassword instead of vchkpw and I still have the same
senario.
/bin/checkpassword generally needs to be run as root to authenticate users.
More than
On Friday 21 May 2004 09:11 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS
security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent Your
e-mailadress and Your password of Your mailbox over the internet.
JKister Are you insinuating
Hello Erwin,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 5:14:30 PM, you wrote:
EH Hi,
EH At 11:41 21.05.04 +0200, you wrote:
Hello blist,
In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS
security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent Your
e-mailadress and Your password of Your
On Friday 21 May 2004 10:21 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
EH This is only true for SMTP Authentication of type plain and login.
EH With CRAM-MD5 its quite save.
Yes, it's 'quite' safe, but You still reveal Your e-mailadress.
If there are many hops between Your workstation and the smtpserver,
Hello Jeremy,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 5:20:40 PM, you wrote:
JK On Friday 21 May 2004 10:21 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
EH This is only true for SMTP Authentication of type plain and login.
EH With CRAM-MD5 its quite save.
Yes, it's 'quite' safe, but You still reveal Your e-mailadress.
If
Hi,
At 17:21 21.05.04 +0200, you wrote:
Hello Erwin,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 5:14:30 PM, you wrote:
EH Hi,
EH At 11:41 21.05.04 +0200, you wrote:
Hello blist,
In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS
security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent
If you're using maildrop it does. Or at least, mine did.
-Original Message-
From: Rick Widmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 3:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] vpopmail
Radu Spineanu wrote:
Hello
does the vpopmail user require a valid
Title: Re: [vchkpw] SMTP Auth HOWTO?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Jeremy,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 5:20:40 PM, you wrote:
JK On Friday 21 May 2004 10:21 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
EH This is only true for SMTP Authentication of type plain and login.
EH With CRAM-MD5 its quite save.
Hello Nick,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 8:02:19 PM, you wrote:
NH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Jeremy,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 5:20:40 PM, you wrote:
JK On Friday 21 May 2004 10:21 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
EH This is only true for SMTP Authentication of type plain and login.
EH With
Hello Erwin,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 7:37:15 PM, you wrote:
EH Hi,
EH At 17:21 21.05.04 +0200, you wrote:
Hello Erwin,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 5:14:30 PM, you wrote:
EH Hi,
EH At 11:41 21.05.04 +0200, you wrote:
Hello blist,
In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it
Hello Patrick,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 9:34:30 PM, you wrote:
PD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PD Hello Erwin,
PD Friday, May 21, 2004, 7:37:15 PM, you wrote:
EH Hi,
EH At 17:21 21.05.04 +0200, you wrote:
PD Hello Erwin,
PD Friday, May 21, 2004, 5:14:30 PM, you wrote:
EH Hi,
EH At
PD Ahhh...yes! A flame war...always nice :)
I quote from the one who has bringing 'the gas': EH You are joking, troll
Well, I did't start. This list is to help people. It's not about to be picky
or to be arrogant, if someone share another view, he has the right to put his vision
forward and to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brooks Roy wrote:
I do not have an open relay. I am trying to setup SMTP Auth. It is not
working.. When users try to auth, it just keeps asking for username
password over and over. Never sends.
How are they authentication? with [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Clayton Weise wrote:
If you're using maildrop it does. Or at least, mine did.
Seconded.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
Hello Nick,
Friday, May 21, 2004, 10:13:29 PM, you wrote:
NH Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NH Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NH Received: (qmail 98433 invoked by uid 1017); 21 May 2004 20:24:45 -
NH Received: from venus.teleshop.name
NH by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-6.2.5)
NH
18 matches
Mail list logo