On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, Tobias Klausmann via Exim-users wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, 08 Jan 2020, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, Tobias Klausmann via Exim-users wrote:
user=$local_part
verify=false
transport = local_delivery
If you have check_local_user you shouldn't need user=$local_part as well.
Ah, good point, thanks.
And this seems to work. I'll test it for a bit and report back.
Is the use of $local_part in the transports seen as safe, or
should I cange those to use $home as well?
On principle I would say change them too.
If $home and /home/$local_part are different directories which do you want ?
The one from the password file/database or the one derived from the
potential hacker's input ?
If /home fills up and you put a new user on a different
disk/partition/volume $home will still work, but /home/$local_part
would need attention ...
Yeah, you're right. I presume I need no extra steps for $home
being defined in the context of the transports?
Not sure.
spec.txt has a transport "procmail_pipe:" which has
user = $local_part
and configure.default does not have check_local_user on any transports.
Best wait for a reply from those who know more than me.
--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
[email protected]
--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
