>> From: "Gordon Rowell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 09:45:53PM +0100, Stanis?aw Winiecki
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hello everybody :)
> >
> > I understand that smtpd is used by e-smith to enhance relay security,
right?
> > Was Qmail not secure enough?
>
> There were a few reasons:
> - qmail provided false positives to relay tests
> - qmail did not allow easy insertion of message processing, such as
> virus scanning, without breaking the qmail license
> - Obtuse SMTPD allows us to add complex anti-spam/anti-relay patterns, such
> as stopping "everyone@site" from being accessed outside the local network
Was Postfix considered and rejected for some reason? I'm still
running my main office on an older hand-customized RedHat
with Sendmail and the main reason I haven't converted to
e-smith yet is that I don't think qmail can match everything
sendmail is doing and I don't like the idea of delivering separate
copies of messages to each member of a group in a remote office
instead of one copy with multiple recipients. Are there any
comparisons or white papers available that show why qmail
was chosen for e-smith? Also, I'm interested in why a patched
imapd is used with a file format the original author won't support.
Wouldn't Cyrus be a better fit where you don't have to support
traditional mailbox format? (I don't have a real complaint here,
I'm just curious about the reasons behind these choices).
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues
Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
