[vchkpw] Set external and internal users
hi all, i have added a domain and can i set my users into 2 group as below ... Example: My email domain is example.com then i wish to set two groups for my domain ... External group: which mean that those user set in this group can send mail to all. Internal group: which mean that those user set in this group can send mail to example.com's users only. Please advise. Thank you Regards, Kenny !DSPAM:48b6477632311714914475!
Re: [vchkpw] CentOS 5 64 bit vchkpw segfault - vpopmail 5.4.9 - softlimit related
Paul Oehler wrote: Hi, We're seeing vchkpw segfault seemingly at random during pop3 authentication, but only on CentOS 5 x86_64. The result is pop3 authentication failing randomly. CentOS 5 32 bit and CentOS 4 64 and 32 bit do not exhibit this behavior, with the same vpopmail code base (5.4.9). This is admittidly not the newest vpopmail version - does this problem sound familiar to anyone and do you recall it being fixed in one of the newer versions? It appears to be related to the "softlimit" command that is used in the invocation of pop3. Attempting to raise the softlimit -m parameter to very high values (as high as 51200) does not prevent the segfault, however, removing the softlimit line entirely does prevent the segfaults. Also, copying the vchkpw binary compiled on a 32 bit CentOS 5 OS to the 64 bit install also "fixes" the problem. I realize 5.4.9 is pretty old, but we don't require many of the new features in the newer vpopmail releases, and would prefer to not have to recompile qmail-smtpd if we can get away with it (where we're using chkuser). In the ChangeLog for 5.4.10 I see this: Stephan Tesch - md5.h: fix related to segfaults in vchkpw on Sparc64. [1144851] What's the likelyhood that is related? You might want to try recompiling everything with out any compiler optimization flags like -O or -O2. We've seen some 64 bit systems have problems if -OX is enabled. With the -O options removed and everything recompiled the problems went away. Hope that helps, Ken Jones
[vchkpw] CentOS 5 64 bit vchkpw segfault - vpopmail 5.4.9 - softlimit related
Hi, We're seeing vchkpw segfault seemingly at random during pop3 authentication, but only on CentOS 5 x86_64. The result is pop3 authentication failing randomly. CentOS 5 32 bit and CentOS 4 64 and 32 bit do not exhibit this behavior, with the same vpopmail code base (5.4.9). This is admittidly not the newest vpopmail version - does this problem sound familiar to anyone and do you recall it being fixed in one of the newer versions? It appears to be related to the "softlimit" command that is used in the invocation of pop3. Attempting to raise the softlimit -m parameter to very high values (as high as 51200) does not prevent the segfault, however, removing the softlimit line entirely does prevent the segfaults. Also, copying the vchkpw binary compiled on a 32 bit CentOS 5 OS to the 64 bit install also "fixes" the problem. I realize 5.4.9 is pretty old, but we don't require many of the new features in the newer vpopmail releases, and would prefer to not have to recompile qmail-smtpd if we can get away with it (where we're using chkuser). In the ChangeLog for 5.4.10 I see this: Stephan Tesch - md5.h: fix related to segfaults in vchkpw on Sparc64. [1144851] What's the likelyhood that is related? Thanks, Paul !DSPAM:48b5743f32312110969750!
Re: [vchkpw] ANNOUNCE: IndiMail authmodule for courier-imap
Top posting, as in "firing for effect". Holy Smokes people, did this become the qmail list overnight? Tom Collins is one of the nicest most helpful people on this list and he has contributed immensely to vpopmail. I for one deeply value his opinion. I do not see inter7 asking for the topic to go away, and I have never seen an "approval" procedure with inter7 for any topic. Can we get back to figuring out how the dir_control system works now? DAve Quey wrote: On 27/08/08 14:03:38, Tom Collins wrote: On Aug 25, 2008, at 9:08 PM, Quey wrote: Do your own homework, hint: there is a reason some distros do not include PAM for very good reasons, and it aint'coz they wana be different' I dont have the time to give you a 50 page lesson on the risks of using it. Translation: I read a headline on digg/reddit/Slashdot/kuro5hin that PAM is insecure. I didn't really understand the article, but I'll act like a security expert and throw my weight around on mailing lists. Actually I dont read any of them, I have far better things to do then read a bunch of whiners posts, half those participants probably see low flying black helicopters every night You have no Idea on my credentials, those who know me, know them, my CEO knows them, the fact you don't doesnt surprise, nor bother me in the least. And I think i'd agree with, oh I dunno, lets say Patrick Volkerding for one, over some twat like you who wants to make out, nobody who has a clue has ever said PAM can be very detrimental. , this is a mailing list for VPopMail, nothing else! Unless you have obtained prior permission from the list maintainers (inter7) for advertising ANYTHING on THEIR list, in which case it usually follows with a disclaimer that it is posted with permission from the maintainers of . The point is, this is of interest to vpopmail users that need a replacement auth module for recent versions of Courier-IMAP. Thats entirely fine so long as inter7 have approved it, if not, it is akin to spamming, regardless of what it is, and if it persists with no approval, his address may be entered into one of reputable RBL's I wont bother responding to the trest of your diatribe, as your just trolling, your one of the immaterial scum of the net, I gonre your types every day, and now i've replied to you, I dont have a need to continue with you any further, since you;ve displayed incredible lack of anything. be gone troll -- Don't tell me I'm driving the cart! !DSPAM:48b55b4e32318337413843!
Re: [vchkpw] ANNOUNCE: IndiMail authmodule for courier-imap
Good evening, On 27/8/08 at 10:42 AM +0300, Boris Pavlov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: offtopic: Quey, or whatever your boss calls you, there is troll around here but it is not Tom Collins. Go fuck yourself - but somewhere else, PLEASE? We are trying to do get some useful info reading this list, not some dick size contest features. I read a few lists with some really bad-tempered and bad-mannered people, but I'd have to say Quey is about the worst I've seen. Has anyone added him to one of those RBL lists yet that he's so fond of? (I'm not familiar with any RBLs for email addresses that work with mailing lists.) Charlie -- Charlie Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PO Box 141, Windsor, NSW 2756, Australia O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt !DSPAM:48b518df32316675238429!
Re: [vchkpw] ANNOUNCE: IndiMail authmodule for courier-imap
Quey wrote: [snip bunch of ego boosts] be gone troll offtopic: Quey, or whatever your boss calls you, there is troll around here but it is not Tom Collins. Go fuck yourself - but somewhere else, PLEASE? We are trying to do get some useful info reading this list, not some dick size contest features. edi. !DSPAM:48b5057a32311248019720!
