On Mon, 05 Feb 2001 15:08:02 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter)
wrote:
> Hi
> 04 Feb 2001, "L.D. Best" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> LB> Perhaps you can suggest to your MIS people that their
> LB> "authentication" isn't really that secure, and
> LB> that the area which needs to protect SMTP is telnet
> What do you mean by that ??
> (area which needs to protect SMTP is telnet ??)
> There are no different versions of SMTP.
> The SMTP demon does not care wether you are human/another program, wether
> you use telnet, or arachne to send to port 25.
> The SMTPd (sendmail, qmail, ...) handles the socket.
> Which program has opened the socket on the other side is completely
> irrelevant !!!
> LB> l.d.
> CU, Ricsi
Richard:
I think you are failing to understand what L.D. is saying. It appears
that she is under the impression that email clients negotiate their
sendmail protocols with some other kind of facility on the server end that
is apart and different and separate from the Telnet facility, although it
may be possible that both facilities share the same port to output a data
product. I also have the same impression as L.D. Were there not some
facility other than Telnet involved, then it would be a reasonable
inference that we would be seeing our email clients receiving the
same kinds of messages and feedback from the server end as we see in our
Telnet clients during a Telnet session. The fact that server end feedback
is not the same when using an email client as when using a Telnet client
would quite naturally lead one to conclude that the that there is some
facility other than Telnet doing business at port 25 on the server end,
and that this other facility may also be used for processing outgoing mail.
I don't know what this other facility might be called, and I am only
hypothesizing its existence based on the observations described above.
Sam Heywood
-- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
