On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 04:03:30PM -0400, grarpamp wrote: > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:23 PM, CustaiCo <custa...@openmailbox.org> wrote: > > I've written an patch that allows msmtp to use a socks > > Good to see someone working on this. > > Is it necessary to invoke new dependencies on third party libraries? > Especially one that hasn't been maintained since 2005? > What about simply including socks5 in msmtp directly? > > You could borrow a socks5 + IPv6 implementation from... > > A tool with 3-clause BSD license: > http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/nc/ > > A tool with GPL + restrictions, has some win/mac code: > https://svn.nmap.org/nmap/ncat/ > > Other tools: > http://www.dest-unreach.org/socat/ > http://www.privoxy.org/ > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOCKS >
nc and ncat and all those are great tools, if your application supports getting the information from standard in/out. I was unable to find a smpt client that did that. I honestly statically linked the antinat code in rather than installing it as a shared library. It's under the GPL2 license, which is a bit more permissive than the GPL3 that msmtp is distributed under. To just yank in somebody's code and bloat the code base with a bunch of proxy code seems pretty pointless. > > It does support tls, but only using gnutls. > Is anyone actually using TLS/GSSAPI in the socks5 client-server path? http://lelantoss7bcnwbv.onion/help.html That hidden service *requires* you to use tls. Yes, it is stupid. There are many others like it. If it wasn't something that some services needed, I would not have bothered with getting the tls working. > The patch has dos CRLF instead of unix CR at line end. It doesn't when I check it in my outbox or when I download it from the web archive and check it with file. Perhaps it's a problem with the list? > Replied because socks5 + IPv6 in msmtp (and even mpop) would be > cool and I think this might be the first work towards that :) > > I'm sure there are lots of users who will point it directly at Tor > 127.0.0.1:9050 so they can reach submission STARTTLS 587 on the > other side. Same for I2P. And their respective hidden services. > > Another code reference... > https://gitweb.torproject.org/torsocks.git torsocks and proxychains are exactly the type of thing I was trying to avoid. It's a nasty hack of LD_PRELOAD that fails many times when you want it to work. I have a few applications that are using it due to lack of any alternative, but I would like to avoid it if possible. Plus, a lazy I2P user would just use susimail anyway. :P It's a rough and unpolished patch. I am fully aware of that. I just think that even as it is it's better than the alternatives. CustaiCo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ msmtp-users mailing list msmtp-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/msmtp-users
