[vchkpw] [SPAM] Auto-Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Emailed Invoice - 782867

[zhaopin]

尊敬的同学：您好！

您的求职简历已经收到，我们会尽快进行阅评，之后再决定是否与您面谈！


  中信泰富（中国）投资有限公司
 人力资源部

!DSPAM:59e8863641491084871729!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Tonix - Antonio Nati]

Il 21/09/2015 14:59, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/17/2015 12:28 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 17/09/2015 13:18, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 03:27 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 15:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 11:00 AM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 11:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:
In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vpopmail.c where 
the password strength is checked even if a password isn't used 
(such as when -e is used to add the encrypted password).  Patch 
attached.







I do not understand the problem.

Of course password strenght is checked every time, and if it 
founds a null/empty password it gives error back if password must 
have a minimum lenght.


Your patch instead permit to have null password even if strenght 
policy would not allow it.


Regards,

Tonino
The problem is is that vadduser.c can call vadduser() (in 
vpopmail.c) without a password.  It does this in the situation 
where vadduser.c has had the options "-e" or "-n" passed to it, so 
if this is the case the password can't be checked againts the 
password strength rules.  The underlying function vadduser() needs 
to be able to add a user with no password.




I realize additional controls are done before calling vadduser(); 
but I personally would prefer an explicit parameter added to 
vadduser for avoiding password check (it may be a further parameter 
having default = "check").

It would make developers more protected against unwanted security bugs.

Regards,

Tonino

I agree that it would be better to explicitly indicate to vadduser() 
that no password is wanted.  I even looked quicky at setting the 
password to NULL to indicate no password, but both this and an 
explicit parameter would need changes to all the backends, so have 
left it as is for now.


It could be done in two ways:

  * considering most od c compilers are c++ compilers, and that means
we can add an implicit parameter (, nocheck_pwd = 0)
  * duplicate the function for this usage, and call the duplicated
function from avdduser when needed.

Regards,

Tonino

I have looked at the backends and it turns out that some of the 
backends can handle a NULL gecos, so expanding on this I have changed 
all the backends to be able to handle a NULL gecos (in which case they 
now all use the user as a gecos) and also handle a NULL password.  So 
vadduser.c can pass a NULL password to vadduser(), vadduser() can then 
check the password_strength() when the password is not NULL.


I think that permitting a null password, if policy does not admit it, is 
a security hole.
Prefer you you add another explicit call to be called for no password 
checking (at all).


Regards,

Tonino




This is going to be the patch I use here, does anyone want this patch ?
 



--

Inter@zioniInterazioni di Antonio Nati
   http://www.interazioni.it  to...@interazioni.it




!DSPAM:5600059741551931516382!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Drew Wells]

On 09/21/2015 02:26 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 21/09/2015 14:59, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/17/2015 12:28 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 17/09/2015 13:18, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 03:27 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 15:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 11:00 AM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 11:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:
In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vpopmail.c where 
the password strength is checked even if a password isn't used 
(such as when -e is used to add the encrypted password).  Patch 
attached.







I do not understand the problem.

Of course password strenght is checked every time, and if it 
founds a null/empty password it gives error back if password 
must have a minimum lenght.


Your patch instead permit to have null password even if strenght 
policy would not allow it.


Regards,

Tonino
The problem is is that vadduser.c can call vadduser() (in 
vpopmail.c) without a password.  It does this in the situation 
where vadduser.c has had the options "-e" or "-n" passed to it, 
so if this is the case the password can't be checked againts the 
password strength rules. The underlying function vadduser() needs 
to be able to add a user with no password.




I realize additional controls are done before calling vadduser(); 
but I personally would prefer an explicit parameter added to 
vadduser for avoiding password check (it may be a further 
parameter having default = "check").
It would make developers more protected against unwanted security 
bugs.


Regards,

Tonino

I agree that it would be better to explicitly indicate to 
vadduser() that no password is wanted.  I even looked quicky at 
setting the password to NULL to indicate no password, but both this 
and an explicit parameter would need changes to all the backends, 
so have left it as is for now.


It could be done in two ways:

  * considering most od c compilers are c++ compilers, and that
means we can add an implicit parameter (, nocheck_pwd = 0)
  * duplicate the function for this usage, and call the duplicated
function from avdduser when needed.

Regards,

Tonino

I have looked at the backends and it turns out that some of the 
backends can handle a NULL gecos, so expanding on this I have changed 
all the backends to be able to handle a NULL gecos (in which case 
they now all use the user as a gecos) and also handle a NULL 
password.  So vadduser.c can pass a NULL password to vadduser(), 
vadduser() can then check the password_strength() when the password 
is not NULL.


I think that permitting a null password, if policy does not admit it, 
is a security hole.
Prefer you you add another explicit call to be called for no password 
checking (at all).


Regards,

Tonino




This is going to be the patch I use here, does anyone want this patch ?


Wouldn't it actually be easier to remove the password parameter from 
vadduser() and then vadduser.c can add a user (without a password) and 
then optionally set a password using vauth_setpw() ?  This is exactly 
what it should do at the moment for adding a user with a crypted 
password, the user is added, then the crypted password is set using 
vauth_setpw().



!DSPAM:56000c6d41552022747047!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/21/2015 08:55 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
>> I think that permitting a null password, if policy does not admit it, is a 
>> security hole. 
>> Prefer you you add another explicit call to be called for no password 
>> checking (at all).
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Tonino
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> This is going to be the patch I use here, does anyone want this patch ?
>> 
> Wouldn't it actually be easier to remove the password parameter from 
> vadduser() and then
> vadduser.c can add a user (without a password) and then optionally set a 
> password using
> vauth_setpw() ?  This is exactly what it should do at the moment for adding a 
> user with a crypted
> password, the user is added, then the crypted password is set using 
> vauth_setpw().

Because vadduser() previously supported an empty password ("\0"), the change to 
check for this and
skip the password strength testing won't be changing its functionality.  The 
password strength check
was not meant to prevent blank passwords, so the fact that it broke the ability 
to set one would be
a bug, and skipping the call to the password strength checker would be a bug 
fix.  vadduser should
not, however, be called with a NULL password.
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings    GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWAA4BAAoJEOjQVexigXNzO1EH/iZtAFYiimKNefgU2mgzAwDf
N639Vq/zN6yDtImnBa9lVW37YZQ9IQ1jCNuQZCk91oUQbagMTP37Q3L+HRsGxcHt
tYEmKjvJXFiqNSuBZfmdFdbr8ENz4mvS0GI3VsE02fXUpMLSXAnIUfv+cnN5bCxD
cEs9aEcNQTntcZzKiUWYW+62MpX3BDbZarOpnHmQznihzorn5wcT12gSQo3QGjxp
ZM5LF9UBXOSuus5hFZHxLPQKhcZCvYSS0SpM+hyjLE4JB2nKEiDAVzZ7kqNi6ZV2
K2ocqLDRg1qpXIFGeB2yqobdXSVLEcb9takRE1xAe+v2Ya3YBK09fyBqewfo2qU=
=B/v4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Drew Wells]

On 09/17/2015 12:28 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 17/09/2015 13:18, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 03:27 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 15:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 11:00 AM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 11:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:
In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vpopmail.c where the 
password strength is checked even if a password isn't used (such 
as when -e is used to add the encrypted password).  Patch attached.







I do not understand the problem.

Of course password strenght is checked every time, and if it 
founds a null/empty password it gives error back if password must 
have a minimum lenght.


Your patch instead permit to have null password even if strenght 
policy would not allow it.


Regards,

Tonino
The problem is is that vadduser.c can call vadduser() (in 
vpopmail.c) without a password.  It does this in the situation 
where vadduser.c has had the options "-e" or "-n" passed to it, so 
if this is the case the password can't be checked againts the 
password strength rules.  The underlying function vadduser() needs 
to be able to add a user with no password.




I realize additional controls are done before calling vadduser(); 
but I personally would prefer an explicit parameter added to 
vadduser for avoiding password check (it may be a further parameter 
having default = "check").

It would make developers more protected against unwanted security bugs.

Regards,

Tonino

I agree that it would be better to explicitly indicate to vadduser() 
that no password is wanted.  I even looked quicky at setting the 
password to NULL to indicate no password, but both this and an 
explicit parameter would need changes to all the backends, so have 
left it as is for now.


It could be done in two ways:

  * considering most od c compilers are c++ compilers, and that means
we can add an implicit parameter (, nocheck_pwd = 0)
  * duplicate the function for this usage, and call the duplicated
function from avdduser when needed.

Regards,

Tonino

I have looked at the backends and it turns out that some of the backends 
can handle a NULL gecos, so expanding on this I have changed all the 
backends to be able to handle a NULL gecos (in which case they now all 
use the user as a gecos) and also handle a NULL password.  So vadduser.c 
can pass a NULL password to vadduser(), vadduser() can then check the 
password_strength() when the password is not NULL.


This is going to be the patch I use here, does anyone want this patch ?


!DSPAM:552d41551245420391!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Drew Wells]

On 09/21/2015 03:02 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/21/2015 08:55 AM, Drew Wells wrote:

I think that permitting a null password, if policy does not admit it, is a 
security hole.
Prefer you you add another explicit call to be called for no password checking 
(at all).

Regards,

Tonino



This is going to be the patch I use here, does anyone want this patch ?

Wouldn't it actually be easier to remove the password parameter from vadduser() 
and then
vadduser.c can add a user (without a password) and then optionally set a 
password using
vauth_setpw() ?  This is exactly what it should do at the moment for adding a 
user with a crypted
password, the user is added, then the crypted password is set using 
vauth_setpw().

Because vadduser() previously supported an empty password ("\0"), the change to 
check for this and
skip the password strength testing won't be changing its functionality.  The 
password strength check
was not meant to prevent blank passwords, so the fact that it broke the ability 
to set one would be
a bug, and skipping the call to the password strength checker would be a bug 
fix.  vadduser should
not, however, be called with a NULL password.

That was exactly what my original patch on the 15th Sept. did and the 
patch is attached to my original message.  I have not attached my NULL 
password changes patch.  I'll revert the patch I use here to my original 
one.


While looking at all this I have noticed that vmoduser.c allows the 
setting of a "clear_text_password" (-C) but does not do any 
password_strength() testing, is this also a bug ?  Lastly, there does 
not seem to be a way of setting "no password" on an account once it has 
been created, is this correct ?


Do you have any idea what needs to be done with regard to some of the 
backends being able to accept a NULL gecos ?


!DSPAM:5600119641556874115760!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Drew Wells]

On 09/17/2015 04:55 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/17/2015 10:52 AM, Drew Wells wrote:

I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that diff to 
5.5.0, some of it
had already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it centered around the snprintf tidy 
up's and the
string_list implementation. The attached patch does not include any of the 
changes I
recently sent to the mailing list, just the changes from 5.4.[29->33].

This patch was generated from the 5.5.0 .tar.bz2, I had a look at SVN trunk and 
from what I could
see, it was 5.4.34.

The trunk on Sourceforge is the current 5.5.0.  The 5.4 series only appears in 
the tags and branches
area now.  I'll look over this patch and get it applied.  Thanks for putting it 
together!

I've just noticed a tiny problem with the previous patch I sent, so here 
is an updated version, this version also includes the missing '#include 
"pwstr.h"' in vadduser.c which causes a segfault on my dev environment 
so thought I should just include it.
The tiny problem was "string_list *aliases" instead of "string_list 
aliases" in vadddomain() in vpopmail.c.



!DSPAM:55fbf97841551215118515!
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.c 
vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.c 2010-11-05 18:37:23.0 
+
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.c  2015-09-18 12:36:07.561092988 
+0100
@@ -1785,10 +1785,10 @@
 limits->maxforwards = atoi(row[2]);
 limits->maxautoresponders = atoi(row[3]);
 limits->maxmailinglists = atoi(row[4]);
-limits->diskquota = atoi(row[5]);
-limits->maxmsgcount = atoi(row[6]);
-limits->defaultquota = atoi(row[7]);
-limits->defaultmaxmsgcount = atoi(row[8]);
+limits->diskquota = strtoll(row[5], NULL, 10);
+limits->maxmsgcount = strtoll(row[6], NULL, 10);
+limits->defaultquota = strtoll(row[7], NULL, 10);
+limits->defaultmaxmsgcount = strtoll(row[8], NULL, 10);
 limits->disable_pop = atoi(row[9]);
 limits->disable_imap = atoi(row[10]);
 limits->disable_dialup = atoi(row[11]);
@@ -1808,8 +1808,8 @@
 limits->perm_maillist_users = perm & VLIMIT_DISABLE_ALL;
 perm >>= VLIMIT_DISABLE_BITS;
 limits->perm_maillist_moderators = perm & VLIMIT_DISABLE_ALL;
-limits->perm_quota = atoi(row[23]);
-limits->perm_defaultquota = atoi(row[24]);
+limits->perm_quota = strtoll(row[23], NULL, 10);
+limits->perm_defaultquota = strtoll(row[24], NULL, 10);
 }
 mysql_free_result(res_read);
 
@@ -1830,7 +1830,7 @@
 "diskquota = %d, maxmsgcount = %d, defaultquota = %d, 
defaultmaxmsgcount = %d, "
 "disable_pop = %d, disable_imap = %d, disable_dialup = %d, "
 "disable_passwordchanging = %d, disable_webmail = %d, disable_relay = 
%d, "
-"disable_smtp = %d, disable_spamassassin = %d, delete_spam = %d, 
perm_account = %d, "
+"disable_smtp = %d, disable_spamassassin = %d, delete_spam = %d, 
disable_maildrop = %d, perm_account = %d, "
 "perm_alias = %d, perm_forward = %d, perm_autoresponder = %d, 
perm_maillist = %d, "
 "perm_quota = %d, perm_defaultquota = %d "
 "ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE "
@@ -1847,7 +1847,7 @@
 limits->diskquota, limits->maxmsgcount, limits->defaultquota, 
limits->defaultmaxmsgcount,
 limits->disable_pop, limits->disable_imap, limits->disable_dialup,
 limits->disable_passwordchanging, limits->disable_webmail, 
limits->disable_relay,
-limits->disable_smtp, limits->disable_spamassassin, 
limits->delete_spam, limits->perm_account,
+limits->disable_smtp, limits->disable_spamassassin, 
limits->delete_spam, limits->disable_maildrop, limits->perm_account,
 limits->perm_alias, limits->perm_forward, limits->perm_autoresponder,
 (limits->perm_maillist |
 (limits->perm_maillist_users << VLIMIT_DISABLE_BITS) |
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.h.in 
vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.h.in
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.h.in  2010-11-05 
18:37:23.0 +
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.h.in   2015-09-18 12:36:07.561092988 
+0100
@@ -268,10 +268,10 @@
   maxforwards  INT(10) NOT NULL DEFAULT -1, \
   maxautorespondersINT(10) NOT NULL DEFAULT -1, \
   maxmailinglists  INT(10) NOT NULL DEFAULT -1, \
-  diskquotaINT(12) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
-  maxmsgcount  INT(12) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
-  defaultquota INT(12) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
-  defaultmaxmsgcount   INT(12) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
+  diskquotaBIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
+  maxmsgcount  BIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
+  defaultquota BIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
+  

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/18/2015 09:30 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
> On 09/18/2015 03:23 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> Applies perfectly!  Thanks!
>> 
>> On 09/18/2015 09:21 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
>>> On 09/18/2015 02:47 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
 
 Drew, I know you've put a lot of effort into these patches, but they do 
 not succeed
 against the 5.5.0 trunk.  Patches should be made against the most recent 
 revision, which
 can be checked out via Subversion from Sourceforge.
 
 On 09/18/2015 08:11 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
> On 09/17/2015 04:55 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On 09/17/2015 10:52 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
> I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that 
> diff to 5.5.0,
> some of it had already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it centered 
> around the
> snprintf tidy up's and the string_list implementation. The attached 
> patch does
> not include any of the changes I recently sent to the mailing list, 
> just the
> changes from 5.4.[29->33].
>>> This patch was generated from the 5.5.0 .tar.bz2, I had a look at SVN 
>>> trunk and from
>>> what I could see, it was 5.4.34.
>> The trunk on Sourceforge is the current 5.5.0.  The 5.4 series only 
>> appears in the
>> tags and branches area now.  I'll look over this patch and get it 
>> applied.  Thanks for
>> putting it together!
>> 
> And lastly for now, someone has done a lot of work in tidying up/making 
> safe all the
> calls to snprintf(), the attached patch completes this work (I think).  
> This patch comes
> after the 5.4.[29->33] patch I did.
> 
> 
>>> Ok, have have downloaded a snapshot .zip file from Sourceforge 
>>> (vpopmail-code-1034.zip) and 
>>> applied the changes to that and attached the patch.  This is the 
>>> 5.4.[29-33] changes patch,
>>> I'll do the snprintf() one later.  Let me know if you need me to do 
>>> anything else with it.
>> 
> Not a problem do excuse my use of the 5.5.0 tar, I'll use SVN trunk from now 
> on.  Here is the 
> snprintf() patch for vpopmail-code-1034.zip.

No problem.  Thanks for your work!
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings    GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV/CJIAAoJEOjQVexigXNzUEQH+wV4Si57TawcIHdnggKhZpav
6Swf4CUPZIfLrM6chNkIrTnR2seb0W3qCIqmMdbo3nzUIfLzMw3ZOikCBKF6hoWq
zQUij+eXwTLWe8JbT4/c3fACBmq4BspJj7q4kIAeypu4hqdjDpxAxVvNmoYh3FCQ
CC3LX0E3PbPHp7mKgzXRQtVrnB9ePxTgu9ZR529BUpI4dwz2FXx+FgmcC/hvBFad
mOBh5vYgVfql0rGWmw/TkWLRNxJzR4ffHIYg7h1jJ6QSMrn/Px4pdGNmOzGIf+tV
asoUPWUIKLL1MlPeV/jviTw0Or7es6ZGbsd+pZl6TEkhowySGB72oexrVTDQXF4=
=ZHVf
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Drew, I know you've put a lot of effort into these patches, but they do not 
succeed against the
5.5.0 trunk.  Patches should be made against the most recent revision, which 
can be checked out via
Subversion from Sourceforge.

On 09/18/2015 08:11 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
> On 09/17/2015 04:55 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On 09/17/2015 10:52 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
> I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that diff to 
> 5.5.0, some of
> it had already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it centered around the 
> snprintf tidy up's
> and the string_list implementation. The attached patch does not include 
> any of the
> changes I recently sent to the mailing list, just the changes from 
> 5.4.[29->33].
>>> This patch was generated from the 5.5.0 .tar.bz2, I had a look at SVN trunk 
>>> and from what I
>>> could see, it was 5.4.34.
>> The trunk on Sourceforge is the current 5.5.0.  The 5.4 series only appears 
>> in the tags and
>> branches area now.  I'll look over this patch and get it applied.  Thanks 
>> for putting it
>> together!
>> 
> And lastly for now, someone has done a lot of work in tidying up/making safe 
> all the calls to 
> snprintf(), the attached patch completes this work (I think).  This patch 
> comes after the
> 5.4.[29->33] patch I did.
> 
> 


- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings    GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV/BXnAAoJEOjQVexigXNzPxkH/jKWMcIwdkpN9xy8OhYHQGuF
+FwowoDJSsEpkJU6flSSWjYvpC0/NJeejzWLWHW0bq7m0ulobpq4z4x4Q7lUlxId
nu7a4+v29qgDw3ccuyIpx+DmgF2DEqi7t/QZlTNeCJ4YzsMBkcUrJI8twoF+RTX/
/8aifV4/+J69V5GrKAMePRIRIaZicVd0NNgLrnaG096r8r7n02jH5G2PTPF0s6Vh
AVaSehh7sxTCBlm8sH08orxLRqRsLakvy3zlxogeLnipJxWLxgQQdkAL8GcfvPIz
LPlXovqegvNtEGrmsAwIP6mXansd0qqC0vTDpUz4ikHXso7ntKHRieHrT4lrevE=
=tzfn
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Drew Wells]

On 09/17/2015 04:55 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/17/2015 10:52 AM, Drew Wells wrote:

I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that diff to 
5.5.0, some of it
had already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it centered around the snprintf tidy 
up's and the
string_list implementation. The attached patch does not include any of the 
changes I
recently sent to the mailing list, just the changes from 5.4.[29->33].

This patch was generated from the 5.5.0 .tar.bz2, I had a look at SVN trunk and 
from what I could
see, it was 5.4.34.

The trunk on Sourceforge is the current 5.5.0.  The 5.4 series only appears in 
the tags and branches
area now.  I'll look over this patch and get it applied.  Thanks for putting it 
together!

And lastly for now, someone has done a lot of work in tidying up/making 
safe all the calls to snprintf(), the attached patch completes this work 
(I think).  This patch comes after the 5.4.[29->33] patch I did.



!DSPAM:55fc0d7341552094314991!
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/vpopmaild.c vpopmail-5.5.0/vpopmaild.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/vpopmaild.c 2015-09-18 13:58:22.048093642 +0100
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/vpopmaild.c  2015-09-18 14:08:11.117095122 +0100
@@ -429,7 +429,7 @@
 return(-2);
   } 
 
-//  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), RET_OK_MORE);
+//  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", RET_OK_MORE);
 //  wait_write();
 
   AuthVpw.pw_name = strdup(tmpvpw->pw_name);
@@ -460,7 +460,7 @@
 logged_in = 1;
 
   if(output_type < 2 ) {
-snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), RET_OK_MORE);
+snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", RET_OK_MORE);
 wait_write();
 
 snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "vpopmail_dir_bin %s" RET_CRLF, 
VPOPMAIL_DIR_BIN);
@@ -485,10 +485,10 @@
 
 send_user_info();
 
-snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "." RET_CRLF);
+snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", "." RET_CRLF);
   }
   else
-snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), RET_OK);
+snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", RET_OK);
 
   return(0);
 }
@@ -525,7 +525,7 @@
 return(-1);
   }
 
-  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), RET_OK);
+  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", RET_OK);
   if ((ret=vadduser(TmpUser, TmpDomain, password, TmpUser, USE_POP )) < 0 ) {
 snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf),RET_ERR "0.305 %s" RET_CRLF, 
verror(ret));
 return(-1);
@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@
 return(-1);
   }
 
-  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), RET_OK);
+  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", RET_OK);
   return(0);
 }
 
@@ -626,7 +626,7 @@
   }
   
 
-  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), RET_OK);
+  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", RET_OK);
   wait_write();
 
   while(fgets(ReadBuf,sizeof(ReadBuf),stdin)!=NULL ) {
@@ -751,7 +751,7 @@
   if ( (ret=vauth_setpw( tmpvpw, TmpDomain )) != 0 ) {
 snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf),RET_ERR "0.507 %s" RET_CRLF, 
verror(ret)); 
   } else {
-snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), RET_OK);
+snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", RET_OK);
   }
 
   return(0);
@@ -787,11 +787,11 @@
 return(-1);
   } 
 
-  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), RET_OK_MORE);
+  snprintf(WriteBuf,sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", RET_OK_MORE);
   wait_write();
 
   send_user_info(tmpvpw);
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "." RET_CRLF);
+  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "%s", "." RET_CRLF);
   return(0);
 
 }
@@ -826,120 +826,79 @@
 
   } else {
 
-if ( tmpvpw->pw_gid & NO_PASSWD_CHNG ) {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_password_change 1" RET_CRLF);
-} else {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_password_change 0" RET_CRLF);
-}
+snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_password_change %d" RET_CRLF,
+  tmpvpw->pw_gid & NO_PASSWD_CHNG ? 1 : 0);
 wait_write();
 
-if ( tmpvpw->pw_gid & NO_POP ) {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_pop 1" RET_CRLF);
-} else {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_pop 0" RET_CRLF);
-}
+snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_pop %d" RET_CRLF,
+  tmpvpw->pw_gid & NO_POP ? 1 : 0);
 wait_write();
 
-if ( tmpvpw->pw_gid & NO_WEBMAIL ) {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_webmail 1" RET_CRLF);
-} else {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_webmail 0" RET_CRLF);
-}
+snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_webmail %d" RET_CRLF,
+  tmpvpw->pw_gid & NO_WEBMAIL ? 1 : 0);
 wait_write();
 
-if ( tmpvpw->pw_gid & NO_IMAP ) {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_imap 1" RET_CRLF);
-} else {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_imap 0" RET_CRLF);
-}
+snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "no_imap %d" RET_CRLF,
+  tmpvpw->pw_gid & NO_IMAP ? 1 : 0);
 wait_write();
 
-if ( tmpvpw->pw_gid & BOUNCE_MAIL ) {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "bounce_mail 1" RET_CRLF);
-} else {
-  snprintf(WriteBuf, sizeof(WriteBuf), "bounce_mail 

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Drew Wells]

On 09/15/2015 03:27 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 15:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 11:00 AM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 11:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:
In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vpopmail.c where the 
password strength is checked even if a password isn't used (such as 
when -e is used to add the encrypted password).  Patch attached.







I do not understand the problem.

Of course password strenght is checked every time, and if it founds 
a null/empty password it gives error back if password must have a 
minimum lenght.


Your patch instead permit to have null password even if strenght 
policy would not allow it.


Regards,

Tonino
The problem is is that vadduser.c can call vadduser() (in vpopmail.c) 
without a password.  It does this in the situation where vadduser.c 
has had the options "-e" or "-n" passed to it, so if this is the case 
the password can't be checked againts the password strength rules.  
The underlying function vadduser() needs to be able to add a user 
with no password.




I realize additional controls are done before calling vadduser(); but 
I personally would prefer an explicit parameter added to vadduser for 
avoiding password check (it may be a further parameter having default 
= "check").

It would make developers more protected against unwanted security bugs.

Regards,

Tonino

I agree that it would be better to explicitly indicate to vadduser() 
that no password is wanted.  I even looked quicky at setting the 
password to NULL to indicate no password, but both this and an explicit 
parameter would need changes to all the backends, so have left it as is 
for now.



!DSPAM:55faa1a741551399290072!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Drew Wells]

On 09/15/2015 02:26 PM, Alessio Cecchi wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 15:10, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 11:06 AM, Alessio Cecchi wrote:


Il 15/09/2015 11:22, Drew Wells ha scritto:

In vpopmail-5.5.0 (and I think all 5.4.x)


Hi Drew,

I suggest to install (and debug) vpopmail-5.4.33 that is more stable,
reliable (and recent) than 5.5.0. Whan I try to use 5.5.0 I found many
bug and problems tha new features.

Why you need vpopmail-5.5.0 ?

I have been using vpopmail-5.4.x (currently vpopmail-5.4.33) for years
and have always added this patch, so in an attempt get 5.5.0 towards
stable I thought I'd send this patch.  This patch is also applicable to
the 5.4.x branch.
The reason I want to use 5.5.0 is the shared library support which means
I don't need to recompile netqmail and dovecot (and others) each time I
make changes to vpopmail.
I've not found that many bugs with vpopmail-5.5.0 to be honest.


I remember some problems with vpopmaild (that I'm using for password 
change via webmail), with large quota size, and a missing flag in 
MySQL limits for disable_maildrop.


Vpomail-5.5.0 was started from 5.4.28 so change from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 
are missing (please correct me if I'm wrong).


If you have others useful patch for vpopmail-5.4 you are welcome :-)

Thanks

I have created a patch for vpopmail-5.5.0 which incoporates all the 
changes from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33, does anyone want this patch or has work 
in vpopmail-5.5.0 stalled ?


!DSPAM:55faa2a041552051216344!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Tonix - Antonio Nati]

Il 17/09/2015 13:18, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 03:27 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 15:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 11:00 AM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 11:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:
In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vpopmail.c where the 
password strength is checked even if a password isn't used (such 
as when -e is used to add the encrypted password).  Patch attached.







I do not understand the problem.

Of course password strenght is checked every time, and if it founds 
a null/empty password it gives error back if password must have a 
minimum lenght.


Your patch instead permit to have null password even if strenght 
policy would not allow it.


Regards,

Tonino
The problem is is that vadduser.c can call vadduser() (in 
vpopmail.c) without a password.  It does this in the situation where 
vadduser.c has had the options "-e" or "-n" passed to it, so if this 
is the case the password can't be checked againts the password 
strength rules.  The underlying function vadduser() needs to be able 
to add a user with no password.




I realize additional controls are done before calling vadduser(); but 
I personally would prefer an explicit parameter added to vadduser for 
avoiding password check (it may be a further parameter having default 
= "check").

It would make developers more protected against unwanted security bugs.

Regards,

Tonino

I agree that it would be better to explicitly indicate to vadduser() 
that no password is wanted.  I even looked quicky at setting the 
password to NULL to indicate no password, but both this and an 
explicit parameter would need changes to all the backends, so have 
left it as is for now.


It could be done in two ways:

 * considering most od c compilers are c++ compilers, and that means we
   can add an implicit parameter (, nocheck_pwd = 0)
 * duplicate the function for this usage, and call the duplicated
   function from avdduser when needed.

Regards,

Tonino


 



--

Inter@zioniInterazioni di Antonio Nati
   http://www.interazioni.it  to...@interazioni.it




!DSPAM:55faa3e241551872413518!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Drew Wells]

On 09/17/2015 04:55 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/17/2015 10:52 AM, Drew Wells wrote:

I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that diff to 
5.5.0, some of it
had already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it centered around the snprintf tidy 
up's and the
string_list implementation. The attached patch does not include any of the 
changes I
recently sent to the mailing list, just the changes from 5.4.[29->33].

This patch was generated from the 5.5.0 .tar.bz2, I had a look at SVN trunk and 
from what I could
see, it was 5.4.34.

The trunk on Sourceforge is the current 5.5.0.  The 5.4 series only appears in 
the tags and branches
area now.  I'll look over this patch and get it applied.  Thanks for putting it 
together!

Not a problem at all.  As you probably saw there are a few patches I 
sent to the list that cover a couple of other issues with the 5.5.0.tar.bz2.


!DSPAM:55fae2d441556321250516!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Drew Wells]

On 09/17/2015 04:04 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Was this patch generated with the SVN trunk (5.5.0)?

On 09/17/2015 09:57 AM, Drew Wells wrote:

On 09/17/2015 03:37 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1

On 09/17/2015 06:23 AM, Drew Wells wrote:

I have created a patch for vpopmail-5.5.0 which incoporates all the changes 
from 5.4.29 to
5.4.33, does anyone want this patch or has work in vpopmail-5.5.0 stalled ?

Drew, I'd be happy to take a look at this.  What changes did you add?


I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that diff to 
5.5.0, some of it had
already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it centered around the snprintf tidy 
up's and the
string_list implementation. The attached patch does not include any of the 
changes I recently
sent to the mailing list, just the changes from 5.4.[29->33].


This patch was generated from the 5.5.0 .tar.bz2, I had a look at SVN 
trunk and from what I could see, it was 5.4.34.


!DSPAM:55fae1c241551761131543!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/17/2015 10:52 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
>>> I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that diff to 
>>> 5.5.0, some of it
>>> had already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it centered around the snprintf 
>>> tidy up's and the 
>>> string_list implementation. The attached patch does not include any of the 
>>> changes I
>>> recently sent to the mailing list, just the changes from 5.4.[29->33].
>> 
> This patch was generated from the 5.5.0 .tar.bz2, I had a look at SVN trunk 
> and from what I could
> see, it was 5.4.34.

The trunk on Sourceforge is the current 5.5.0.  The 5.4 series only appears in 
the tags and branches
area now.  I'll look over this patch and get it applied.  Thanks for putting it 
together!
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings    GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV+uJcAAoJEOjQVexigXNzXowIALkzVHSRgVq3Ojq1Pv32jdI4
vRaX0jDhbhNzDTCPex5tcwLB71olOm2LYzV/GKBoXudeZYz/SjppccCk43FRhZnj
h76PKiI1484e4kRD1JYkgjP85YKh0I5if2eeL28zm7fDb8qwNG3Djs2xyH9m5+wN
nlPfEtF+e1Pi5PBa8WDFHilF+P6XlV5kwxsuXmZV8JD8EogyplMAs1ksteA6tmJH
vXEAB4xJfstVB6l27mxq1VVNqyE0KUN4inCuxVuuS/nUxJI576V6B/kUQ+DyVANj
ce4gD45L7YzWs4PAwnEcdseai82Jag4J6UaRIhLwTYEwridI1D9GnA7ZSHOmoK8=
=Pl67
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Drew Wells]

On 09/17/2015 03:37 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/17/2015 06:23 AM, Drew Wells wrote:

I have created a patch for vpopmail-5.5.0 which incoporates all the changes 
from 5.4.29 to
5.4.33, does anyone want this patch or has work in vpopmail-5.5.0 stalled ?

Drew, I'd be happy to take a look at this.  What changes did you add?

I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that diff 
to 5.5.0, some of it had already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it 
centered around the snprintf tidy up's and the string_list implementation.
The attached patch does not include any of the changes I recently sent 
to the mailing list, just the changes from 5.4.[29->33].



!DSPAM:55fad4d841551123915585!
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.c 
vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.c 2010-11-05 18:37:23.0 
+
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.c  2015-09-17 11:41:02.724095923 
+0100
@@ -1785,10 +1785,10 @@
 limits->maxforwards = atoi(row[2]);
 limits->maxautoresponders = atoi(row[3]);
 limits->maxmailinglists = atoi(row[4]);
-limits->diskquota = atoi(row[5]);
-limits->maxmsgcount = atoi(row[6]);
-limits->defaultquota = atoi(row[7]);
-limits->defaultmaxmsgcount = atoi(row[8]);
+limits->diskquota = strtoll(row[5], NULL, 10);
+limits->maxmsgcount = strtoll(row[6], NULL, 10);
+limits->defaultquota = strtoll(row[7], NULL, 10);
+limits->defaultmaxmsgcount = strtoll(row[8], NULL, 10);
 limits->disable_pop = atoi(row[9]);
 limits->disable_imap = atoi(row[10]);
 limits->disable_dialup = atoi(row[11]);
@@ -1808,8 +1808,8 @@
 limits->perm_maillist_users = perm & VLIMIT_DISABLE_ALL;
 perm >>= VLIMIT_DISABLE_BITS;
 limits->perm_maillist_moderators = perm & VLIMIT_DISABLE_ALL;
-limits->perm_quota = atoi(row[23]);
-limits->perm_defaultquota = atoi(row[24]);
+limits->perm_quota = strtoll(row[23], NULL, 10);
+limits->perm_defaultquota = strtoll(row[24], NULL, 10);
 }
 mysql_free_result(res_read);
 
@@ -1830,7 +1830,7 @@
 "diskquota = %d, maxmsgcount = %d, defaultquota = %d, 
defaultmaxmsgcount = %d, "
 "disable_pop = %d, disable_imap = %d, disable_dialup = %d, "
 "disable_passwordchanging = %d, disable_webmail = %d, disable_relay = 
%d, "
-"disable_smtp = %d, disable_spamassassin = %d, delete_spam = %d, 
perm_account = %d, "
+"disable_smtp = %d, disable_spamassassin = %d, delete_spam = %d, 
disable_maildrop = %d, perm_account = %d, "
 "perm_alias = %d, perm_forward = %d, perm_autoresponder = %d, 
perm_maillist = %d, "
 "perm_quota = %d, perm_defaultquota = %d "
 "ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE "
@@ -1847,7 +1847,7 @@
 limits->diskquota, limits->maxmsgcount, limits->defaultquota, 
limits->defaultmaxmsgcount,
 limits->disable_pop, limits->disable_imap, limits->disable_dialup,
 limits->disable_passwordchanging, limits->disable_webmail, 
limits->disable_relay,
-limits->disable_smtp, limits->disable_spamassassin, 
limits->delete_spam, limits->perm_account,
+limits->disable_smtp, limits->disable_spamassassin, 
limits->delete_spam, limits->disable_maildrop, limits->perm_account,
 limits->perm_alias, limits->perm_forward, limits->perm_autoresponder,
 (limits->perm_maillist |
 (limits->perm_maillist_users << VLIMIT_DISABLE_BITS) |
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.h.in 
vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.h.in
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.h.in  2010-11-05 
18:37:23.0 +
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.h.in   2015-09-17 11:41:02.725095861 
+0100
@@ -268,10 +268,10 @@
   maxforwards  INT(10) NOT NULL DEFAULT -1, \
   maxautorespondersINT(10) NOT NULL DEFAULT -1, \
   maxmailinglists  INT(10) NOT NULL DEFAULT -1, \
-  diskquotaINT(12) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
-  maxmsgcount  INT(12) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
-  defaultquota INT(12) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
-  defaultmaxmsgcount   INT(12) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
+  diskquotaBIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
+  maxmsgcount  BIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
+  defaultquota BIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
+  defaultmaxmsgcount   BIGINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
   disable_pop  TINYINT(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
   disable_imap TINYINT(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
   disable_dialup   TINYINT(1) NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, \
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backfill.c vpopmail-5.5.0/backfill.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backfill.c  2010-11-05 18:37:22.0 +
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/backfill.c   2015-09-17 

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 09/17/2015 06:23 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
> I have created a patch for vpopmail-5.5.0 which incoporates all the changes 
> from 5.4.29 to
> 5.4.33, does anyone want this patch or has work in vpopmail-5.5.0 stalled ?

Drew, I'd be happy to take a look at this.  What changes did you add?
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings    GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV+tA3AAoJEOjQVexigXNzpoAIAJHChv9aNWE5TGdYIRVExQxs
cKyi14LUwIMupA3HX4GNTTBy9bMF6HVgWxMqRA3WOq3KzRGhwi2fT9J1lQseaC5X
U4Fd5qQ8eeiYcl8yakT+ZPjwDRSLbkNX98akynm1QDT92/YNgaZ55F6aE2uH2IVg
8rMDw96OohaJJHGCt9XZouTEuQZgTZKunWoKYMgpqvH5NdCvDxP2SgeOu7uRLPoM
e5w1Gqc2p9xP0VxgmqMPEl5Yp8uTQXfUjQrbw2Soe55OnnJXtxoJ3gCrPxdwAgLj
pHxZXJjon+681cYOJr+xX6grUuPuZIlV1y3WRzvgo8m1sD/VFq8WN/roWNYV0EA=
=LSon
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Was this patch generated with the SVN trunk (5.5.0)?

On 09/17/2015 09:57 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
> On 09/17/2015 03:37 PM, Matt Brookings wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On 09/17/2015 06:23 AM, Drew Wells wrote:
>>> I have created a patch for vpopmail-5.5.0 which incoporates all the changes 
>>> from 5.4.29 to 
>>> 5.4.33, does anyone want this patch or has work in vpopmail-5.5.0 stalled ?
>> Drew, I'd be happy to take a look at this.  What changes did you add?
>> 
> I basically did a diff from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 and implemented that diff to 
> 5.5.0, some of it had 
> already been done to 5.5.0 and alot of it centered around the snprintf tidy 
> up's and the
> string_list implementation. The attached patch does not include any of the 
> changes I recently
> sent to the mailing list, just the changes from 5.4.[29->33].

- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings    GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJV+tZ9AAoJEOjQVexigXNzbnYH/2CBtOVqqKBntlGUYQNMzf46
PEyxaODsZjaBmyJKBSL7lU30UzEanbWTbo1XSCj7lx+YRB7v9e90SMDVSbYXbaDh
I2WGhqD+dHVOBbi7b+WtLPAeixPnFOS5EMcWggL+OK9xbF55WsFDQhz7b3wNJGmR
4klK0mEG6a22l2cScAjH7afXzRJpy/Vz6RpBvW+1wGz8R0nRPw6VDpiiiPbqLSpr
S4uDboSTdo2Ah6dFXQDns2Au/JYYB+Ip33f+rYaTyNjL4dUq9Emg/hZNFyy11KgU
0ldCRPX+h1EKtNoh65FAxRWF8tlCYufjw1M9E30neO48dwDVV5AyDRALKxdOjvA=
=6IBz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [vchkpw] vdelivermail writes the wrong ,S= value when spamassassin is enabled

[Rolf Eike Beer]

> When spamassassin is enabled but maildrop is not I see failed assertions in
> dovecots POP server[2], which are caused by vdelivermail using a wrong
> filename. The filename, more exactly the S= value is calculated
> _before_ the mail is piped into spamassassin, which adds two more header
> lines with it's scan results, so the actual size afterwards is bigger than
> what is recorded. The attached patch #5 fixes this for me, with some
> cleanups in #1-#4 I did on the way to find the culprit.

Ping?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
!DSPAM:55fafb1041552455840022!

[vchkpw] Auto-Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[zhaopin]

尊敬的同学：您好！

您的求职简历已经收到，我们会尽快进行阅评，之后再决定是否与您面谈！


  中信泰富（中国）投资有限公司
 人力资源部

!DSPAM:55f7e0eb41551555158803!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Drew Wells]

In vpopmail-5.5.0 (and I think all 5.4.x) there seems to be no way of 
removing an alias_line using valias, I've added this functionality.  
Patch attached.



!DSPAM:55f7e35241555071313485!
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/valias.c vpopmail-5.5.0/valias.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/valias.c2010-11-05 18:37:22.0 +
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/valias.c 2015-09-04 12:39:34.999094668 +0100
@@ -38,8 +38,9 @@
 
 #define VALIAS_SELECT 0
 #define VALIAS_INSERT 1
-#define VALIAS_DELETE 2
-#define VALIAS_NAMES  3
+#define VALIAS_REMOVE 2
+#define VALIAS_DELETE 3
+#define VALIAS_NAMES  4
 
 int AliasAction;
 int AliasExists;
@@ -119,6 +120,23 @@
}
break;
 
+   case VALIAS_REMOVE:
+   /* check to see if it already exists */
+   AliasExists = 0;
+   tmpalias = valias_select( Alias, Domain );
+   while (tmpalias != NULL ) {
+   if (strcmp (tmpalias, AliasLine) == 0) AliasExists = 1;
+   tmpalias = valias_select_next();
+   }
+   if (AliasExists) {
+   valias_remove( Alias, Domain, AliasLine );
+   } else {
+   fprintf (stderr, "Error: alias %s -> %s does not 
exist.\n",
+   Email, AliasLine);
+   vexit(-1);
+   }
+   break;
+
case VALIAS_DELETE:
valias_delete( Alias, Domain );
break;
@@ -139,6 +157,7 @@
printf(" -s ( show aliases, can use just domain )\n");
printf(" -d ( delete alias )\n");
printf(" -i alias_line (insert alias line)\n");
+   printf(" -r alias_line (remove alias line)\n");
printf("\n");
printf("Example: valias -i f...@inter7.com b...@inter7.com\n");
printf(" (adds alias from b...@inter7.com to 
f...@inter7.com\n");
@@ -157,7 +176,7 @@
memset(AliasLine, 0, sizeof(AliasLine));
AliasAction = VALIAS_SELECT;
 
-   while( (c=getopt(argc,argv,"vnsdi:")) != -1 ) {
+   while( (c=getopt(argc,argv,"vnsr:di:")) != -1 ) {
switch(c) {
case 'v':
printf("version: %s\n", VERSION);
@@ -168,6 +187,10 @@
case 's':
AliasAction = VALIAS_SELECT;
break;
+   case 'r':
+   AliasAction = VALIAS_REMOVE;
+   snprintf(AliasLine, sizeof(AliasLine), "%s", optarg);
+   break;
case 'd':
AliasAction = VALIAS_DELETE;
break;

[vchkpw] Auto-Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[zhaopin]

尊敬的同学：您好！

您的求职简历已经收到，我们会尽快进行阅评，之后再决定是否与您面谈！


  中信泰富（中国）投资有限公司
 人力资源部

!DSPAM:55f7e35941551360728760!

[vchkpw] Auto-Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] vdominfo quota bug

[zhaopin]

尊敬的同学：您好！

您的求职简历已经收到，我们会尽快进行阅评，之后再决定是否与您面谈！


  中信泰富（中国）投资有限公司
 人力资源部

!DSPAM:55f7e55641551049011877!

RE: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Segmentation fault in vadduser

[Thibault Richard]

This is probably why the 5.4.0 is still not considered as stable (the latest 
stable version is still 5.4.33)

-Original Message-
From: Drew Wells [mailto:drew-vpopm...@elysium.ltd.uk] 
Sent: Tuesday 15 September 2015 11:19
To: vchkpw@inter7.com
Subject: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Segmentation fault in vadduser

In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vadduser that causes a 
segmentation fault when a password does not pass the password_strength rules.  
Patch attached.





!DSPAM:55f7e75c41551355020703!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Alessio Cecchi]

Il 15/09/2015 11:22, Drew Wells ha scritto:

In vpopmail-5.5.0 (and I think all 5.4.x)


Hi Drew,

I suggest to install (and debug) vpopmail-5.4.33 that is more stable, 
reliable (and recent) than 5.5.0. Whan I try to use 5.5.0 I found many 
bug and problems tha new features.


Why you need vpopmail-5.5.0 ?
--
Alessio Cecchi
https://www.linkedin.com/in/alessice

!DSPAM:55f7edb641552122517293!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Segmentation fault in vadduser

[Drew Wells]

In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vadduser that causes a 
segmentation fault when a password does not pass the password_strength 
rules.  Patch attached.



!DSPAM:55f7e27341551399513616!
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/vadduser.c vpopmail-5.5.0/vadduser.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/vadduser.c  2010-11-05 18:37:22.0 +
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/vadduser.c   2015-09-14 12:49:23.957094657 +0100
@@ -28,16 +28,19 @@
 #include 
 #include "config.h"
 #include "vpopmail.h"
-#include "vauth.h"
 #include "vauthmodule.h"
+#include "vauth.h"
+#include "pwstr.h"
 
 char Email[MAX_BUFF];
+char User[MAX_BUFF];
+char Domain[MAX_BUFF];
 char Passwd[MAX_BUFF];
 char Quota[MAX_BUFF];
 char Gecos[MAX_BUFF];
 char Crypted[MAX_BUFF];
 
-int apop;
+int apop = USE_POP;
 int RandomPw;
 int NoPassword = 0;
 
@@ -47,8 +50,6 @@
 int main(int argc,char **argv)
 {
  int i;
- char User[MAX_BUFF];
- char Domain[MAX_BUFF];
  struct vqpasswd *vpw;
 
 i = vauth_load_module(NULL);

[vchkpw] Auto-Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Segmentation fault in vadduser

[zhaopin]

尊敬的同学：您好！

您的求职简历已经收到，我们会尽快进行阅评，之后再决定是否与您面谈！


  中信泰富（中国）投资有限公司
 人力资源部

!DSPAM:55f7e27941558004510909!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Drew Wells]

In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vpopmail.c where the 
password strength is checked even if a password isn't used (such as when 
-e is used to add the encrypted password).  Patch attached.



!DSPAM:55f7df0641553245911066!
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/vpopmail.c vpopmail-5.5.0/vpopmail.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/vpopmail.c  2015-09-08 11:33:44.818094999 +0100
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/vpopmail.c   2015-09-08 11:39:56.791096019 +0100
@@ -686,13 +686,11 @@
 
   if ( vauth_getpw( username, domain ) != NULL ) return(VA_USERNAME_EXISTS);
 
-  /*
- Check password strength
-  */
-
-  ret = pw_strength(password);
-  if (ret != 1)
-return ret;
+  /* Check password strength */
+  if ( password[0] != '\0' ) {
+ret = pw_strength(password);
+if (ret != 1) return ret;
+  }
 
   /* record the dir where the vadduser command was run from */
   getcwd(calling_dir, sizeof(calling_dir));

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Onchange script

[Drew Wells]

I use the onchange functionality in vpopmail-5.5.0 but find it awkward 
that the script is only called once for "add_domain", instead of calling 
the script with "add_domain", "add_user" then "mod_user" so have written 
a patch to allow this.  One side affect is that the order of calls in 
vadduser() has changed.  Patch attached.



!DSPAM:55f7e1c341551875619181!
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/cdb/vcdb.c 
vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/cdb/vcdb.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/cdb/vcdb.c 2010-11-05 18:37:23.0 
+
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/cdb/vcdb.c  2015-09-04 12:42:00.306095822 +0100
@@ -664,12 +664,16 @@
 #endif
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */
snprintf ( onchange_buf, MAX_BUFF, "%s@%s", inpw->pw_name, domain ) ;
call_onchange ( "mod_user" ) ;
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
}
 #endif
+#endif
 
if (!(strcasecmp(inpw->pw_shell, "NOQUOTA")))
   remove_maildirsize(inpw->pw_dir);
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/ldap/vldap.c 
vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/ldap/vldap.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/ldap/vldap.c   2010-11-05 18:37:24.0 
+
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/ldap/vldap.c2015-09-04 12:42:00.307095769 
+0100
@@ -972,12 +972,16 @@
 #endif
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */
snprintf ( onchange_buf, MAX_BUFF, "%s@%s", inpw->pw_name, domain );
call_onchange ( "mod_user" );
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
}
 #endif
+#endif
 
if (!(strcasecmp(inpw->pw_shell, "NOQUOTA")))
   remove_maildirsize(inpw->pw_dir);
@@ -1733,12 +1737,16 @@
 }
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */
snprintf ( onchange_buf, MAX_BUFF, "%s@%s - %s", alias, domain, 
alias_line );
call_onchange ( "alias_insert" );
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
}
 #endif
+#endif
 
 return(0);
 }
@@ -1756,12 +1764,16 @@
 if ( (err=ldap_connect()) != 0 ) return(err);
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */
snprintf ( onchange_buf, MAX_BUFF, "%s@%s - %s", alias, domain, 
alias_line );
call_onchange ( "alias_remove" );
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
}
 #endif
+#endif
 
memset(ud, 0, sizeof(ud));
snprintf(ud, sizeof(ud), "%s@%s", alias, domain);
@@ -1863,12 +1875,16 @@
 if ( (err=ldap_connect()) != 0 ) return(err);
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */
snprintf ( onchange_buf, MAX_BUFF, "%s@%s", alias, domain );
call_onchange ( "alias_delete" );
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
}
 #endif
+#endif
 
memset(ud, 0, sizeof(ud));
snprintf(ud, sizeof(ud), "%s@%s", alias, domain);
diff -uPr vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.c 
vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.c
--- vpopmail-5.5.0.orig/backends/mysql/vmysql.c 2010-11-05 18:37:23.0 
+
+++ vpopmail-5.5.0/backends/mysql/vmysql.c  2015-09-04 12:42:00.308095716 
+0100
@@ -875,12 +875,16 @@
 #endif
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */
snprintf ( onchange_buf, MAX_BUFF, "%s@%s", inpw->pw_name, domain );
call_onchange ( "mod_user" );
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
}
 #endif
+#endif
 
if (!(strcasecmp(inpw->pw_shell, "NOQUOTA")))
   remove_maildirsize(inpw->pw_dir);
@@ -1459,12 +1463,16 @@
 }
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */
snprintf ( onchange_buf, MAX_BUFF, "%s@%s - %s", alias, domain, 
alias_line );
call_onchange ( "valias_insert" );
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
}
 #endif
+#endif
 
 return(0);
 }
@@ -1478,12 +1486,16 @@
 if ( (err=vauth_open_update()) != 0 ) return(err);
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */
snprintf ( onchange_buf, MAX_BUFF, "%s@%s - %s", alias, domain, 
alias_line );
call_onchange ( "valias_remove" );
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
}
 #endif
+#endif
 
 qnprintf( SqlBufUpdate, SQL_BUF_SIZE, 
 "DELETE FROM valias WHERE alias = '%s' \
@@ -1508,12 +1520,16 @@
 if ( (err=vauth_open_update()) != 0 ) return(err);
 
 #ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT
+#ifdef ONCHANGE_SCRIPT_ALLOW
 if( allow_onchange ) {
+#endif
/* tell other programs that data has changed */

[vchkpw] Auto-Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Onchange script

[zhaopin]

尊敬的同学：您好！

您的求职简历已经收到，我们会尽快进行阅评，之后再决定是否与您面谈！


  中信泰富（中国）投资有限公司
 人力资源部

!DSPAM:55f7e1cc41551654711741!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Tonix - Antonio Nati]

Il 15/09/2015 11:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:
In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vpopmail.c where the 
password strength is checked even if a password isn't used (such as 
when -e is used to add the encrypted password).  Patch attached.







I do not understand the problem.

Of course password strenght is checked every time, and if it founds a 
null/empty password it gives error back if password must have a minimum 
lenght.


Your patch instead permit to have null password even if strenght policy 
would not allow it.


Regards,

Tonino

--

Inter@zioniInterazioni di Antonio Nati
   http://www.interazioni.it  to...@interazioni.it




!DSPAM:55f7ec4641551939410840!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Password strength bug

[Tonix - Antonio Nati]

Il 15/09/2015 15:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 11:00 AM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 11:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:
In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vpopmail.c where the 
password strength is checked even if a password isn't used (such as 
when -e is used to add the encrypted password).  Patch attached.







I do not understand the problem.

Of course password strenght is checked every time, and if it founds a 
null/empty password it gives error back if password must have a 
minimum lenght.


Your patch instead permit to have null password even if strenght 
policy would not allow it.


Regards,

Tonino
The problem is is that vadduser.c can call vadduser() (in vpopmail.c) 
without a password.  It does this in the situation where vadduser.c 
has had the options "-e" or "-n" passed to it, so if this is the case 
the password can't be checked againts the password strength rules.  
The underlying function vadduser() needs to be able to add a user with 
no password.




I realize additional controls are done before calling vadduser(); but I 
personally would prefer an explicit parameter added to vadduser for 
avoiding password check (it may be a further parameter having default = 
"check").

It would make developers more protected against unwanted security bugs.

Regards,

Tonino


 



--

Inter@zioniInterazioni di Antonio Nati
   http://www.interazioni.it  to...@interazioni.it




!DSPAM:55f82abc41552085678254!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] valias remove alias

[Drew Wells]

On 09/15/2015 02:26 PM, Alessio Cecchi wrote:

Il 15/09/2015 15:10, Drew Wells ha scritto:

On 09/15/2015 11:06 AM, Alessio Cecchi wrote:


Il 15/09/2015 11:22, Drew Wells ha scritto:

In vpopmail-5.5.0 (and I think all 5.4.x)


Hi Drew,

I suggest to install (and debug) vpopmail-5.4.33 that is more stable,
reliable (and recent) than 5.5.0. Whan I try to use 5.5.0 I found many
bug and problems tha new features.

Why you need vpopmail-5.5.0 ?

I have been using vpopmail-5.4.x (currently vpopmail-5.4.33) for years
and have always added this patch, so in an attempt get 5.5.0 towards
stable I thought I'd send this patch.  This patch is also applicable to
the 5.4.x branch.
The reason I want to use 5.5.0 is the shared library support which means
I don't need to recompile netqmail and dovecot (and others) each time I
make changes to vpopmail.
I've not found that many bugs with vpopmail-5.5.0 to be honest.


I remember some problems with vpopmaild (that I'm using for password 
change via webmail), with large quota size, and a missing flag in 
MySQL limits for disable_maildrop.


Vpomail-5.5.0 was started from 5.4.28 so change from 5.4.29 to 5.4.33 
are missing (please correct me if I'm wrong).


If you have others useful patch for vpopmail-5.4 you are welcome :-)

Thanks

If that is the case (the missing 5.4.29 -> 5.4.33 changes) I'll have a 
look and get those changes into 5.5.0, I'd really like to use the shared 
library support.


!DSPAM:55f81f7741555484815027!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Segmentation fault in vadduser

[Drew Wells]

Yes, I know - that's I did some work on 5.5.0 and fixed the segmentation 
fault to try and get it closer to stable.


On 09/15/2015 10:39 AM, Thibault Richard wrote:

This is probably why the 5.4.0 is still not considered as stable (the latest 
stable version is still 5.4.33)

-Original Message-
From: Drew Wells [mailto:drew-vpopm...@elysium.ltd.uk]
Sent: Tuesday 15 September 2015 11:19
To: vchkpw@inter7.com
Subject: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Segmentation fault in vadduser

In vpopmail-5.5.0 there seems to be a bug in vadduser that causes a 
segmentation fault when a password does not pass the password_strength rules.  
Patch attached.










!DSPAM:55f8140941551047816349!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] integrated with maildrop

[Nethub Online - Ming]

Hi all,

Recently I tested vpopmail-5.4.25 / 5.4.33 with maildrop 2.7 / 2.8.2, I
found that it will add a From  header to the first line of email, like this:

From r...@helloworld.com Fri Jun 26 06:27:19 2015

However while I use maildrop 2.6, there is no such problem. I found that
vdelivermail.c of vpopmail contains this line:

sprintf(maildrop_command, | preline %s, MAILDROP_PROG);

After I removed preline , then the maildrop won't add From  header
anymore. And I checked preline is the qmail binary which is
/var/qmail/bin/preline.



After discussing with Sam Varshavchik of courier-mta (discussion is here: 
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.maildrop/5331/focus=5331 , thread id is
5331 - 5339), preline let maildrop think it's delivering to an mbox file, so
that the From_ line is added.

I tried to figure out in source of vpopmail  maildrop but no luck, could
anyone help? Now I don't know the problem should be solved in vpopmail or
maildrop.

Besides, is it safe to remove preline  like this:


sprintf(maildrop_command, | %s, MAILDROP_PROG);


!DSPAM:5595f98b41556730565444!

[vchkpw] Auto-Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] integrated with maildrop

[zhaopin]

尊敬的同学：您好！

您的求职简历已经收到，我们会尽快进行阅评，之后再决定是否与您面谈！


  中信泰富（中国）投资有限公司
 人力资源部

!DSPAM:5595fb4341556565779328!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Include trashed (\Deleted) messages in quota usage

[Teodor Milkov]

Hello,

Currently vpopmail doesn't include trashed messages in quota usage. 
These are messages that were marked as deleted (IMAP flag \Deleted) but 
are still not expunged. These are denoted by the T flag in Maildir: 
http://cr.yp.to/proto/maildir.html


It seems two of the popular mail servers out there have opposing 
behavior: courier doesn't count trashed messages while dovecot does 
count them.


In my setup I have some users, who seem to forgot to expunge (also known 
as Compact in thunderbird) their mailboxes and trahsed messages keep 
piling up and filling filesystems. That's why I prefer including trashed 
messages in quota usage and forcing users to take measures this way.


I guess it'd be best to add a configuration option (either ./configure 
compile time or runtime to some config file), but for my specific case I 
patched maildirquota.c with the attached patch.


HTH someone.


Best regards,
Teodor


!DSPAM:54d9e9c441146365629053!
--- maildirquota.h.orig	2015-02-03 14:34:30.0 +0200
+++ maildirquota.h	2015-02-03 14:19:38.0 +0200
@@ -16,6 +16,12 @@
 #define MAILDIRSIZE_OVERLEN 5120
 #define MAILDIRSIZE_OLD_SECS 15*60
 
+/*
+ * Count messages marked as deleted, but still not expunged:
+ * http://cr.yp.to/proto/maildir.html
+ */
+#define QUOTA_COUNT_TRASHED 1
+
 /* I've removed pretty much the whole file execept for
some public functions so as to not conflict with courier.
Ive made the courier functions static.
--- maildirquota.c.orig	2015-02-03 13:15:37.0 +0200
+++ maildirquota.c	2015-02-03 14:35:47.0 +0200
@@ -990,9 +990,7 @@
 	const char *n=de-d_name;
 
 		if (*n == '.')	continue;
-
-		/* PATCH - do not count msgs marked as deleted */
-
+#if QUOTA_COUNT_TRASHED == 0
 		for ( ; *n; n++)
 		{
 			if (n[0] != ':' || n[1] != '2' ||
@@ -1006,6 +1004,7 @@
 			break;
 		}
 		if (*n == 'T')	continue;
+#endif
 		n=de-d_name;
 
 

Re: [vchkpw] vlog has not entries since upgrade

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 12/10/2014 10:36 AM, John Stile wrote:
 I have not seen any new additions to the mysql table vlog for a long time, so 
 I am worried an
 update broke something.
 
 I am using vpopmail-5.4.33-r1, mysql-5.5.40, and netqmail-1.06-r2
 
 I tried to delete the vlong table and recreate from what I have read in the 
 source file
 vpopmail-5.4.33/vmysql.c, but still no change.
 
 What could be happening? How can I debug this, when eveything runs though 
 tcpserver?
 
 I am on gentoo, so I hope it is not too spam-ish to show my configure and 
 build log:

John, it's difficult to tell why it's not working from what you've sent along, 
but it sounds like it
could be related to the deletion and re-creation of the table.

Your best bet for debugging is going to be to strace/gdb a manually run qmail 
service that calls
vpopmail.  If you're not comfortable with that, you could try printf debugging. 
 And lastly, if
you're not comfortable with that, feel free to give us a call, and we can help 
you out.

Good luck!
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com   GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUiwgQAAoJEOjQVexigXNzKBwH/AgOWlCZNrPysL4kdTub9XjN
5XIrzqlyBR9CD1We3eIKGE4p7UY5sLg4vLOSDptZC0eOLlPb3E6V/1vIYWqJMXv5
H9F8tKgcSSwOAvc9rJdjPFH7r0hv46I3tfxlgM6u0VnUWAydf+Hx6DQ/ILvAsiDL
kmlMe2i22d/TALYGjTSZi3JTfL9v+mYSyRRkaD4as3VTx3hhejgnfT7uXO6xNtRz
+Rru7pLYFr0yRpCYaE/JaJNXojG+Kru8V5+4/nGjbD5wLrYbvZ6AtLM7SMcLw5Am
MdSrGNXqXFEjH07xhaNXIgy5OW9CFiS7D6relrI/gaXWjM8gqAhNyrZBtnZkhaw=
=JM35
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[vchkpw] vlog has not entries since upgrade

[John Stile]

I have not seen any new additions to the mysql table vlog for a long
time, so I am worried an update broke something.

I am using vpopmail-5.4.33-r1, mysql-5.5.40, and netqmail-1.06-r2

I tried to delete the vlong table and recreate from what I have read in
the source file vpopmail-5.4.33/vmysql.c, but still no change.

What could be happening?
How can I debug this, when eveything runs though tcpserver?

I am on gentoo, so I hope it is not too spam-ish to show my configure
and build log:

 Emerging (1 of 1) net-mail/vpopmail-5.4.33-r1::gentoo
 * vpopmail-5.4.33.tar.gz SHA256 SHA512 WHIRLPOOL size ;-) ...  

  [ ok ]
 * 
 * Massive important warning if you are upgrading to 5.2.1-r8 or older
 * The internal structure of the mail storage has changed for
 * consistancy with the rest of Gentoo! Please review and utilize the 
 * script at /bin/vpopmail-Maildir-dotmaildir-fix.sh
 * to upgrade your system! (It can do conversions both ways).
 * You should be able to run it right away without any changes.
 * 
 * 
 * Use of vpopmail's tcp.smtp[.cdb] is also deprecated now, consider
 * using net-mail/relay-ctrl instead.
 * 
 * 
 * If you are upgrading from 5.4.17 or older, you have to fix your
 * MySQL tables:
 * 
 * ALTER TABLE `dir_control` CHANGE `domain` `domain` CHAR(96) NOT NULL;
 * ALTER TABLE `ip_alias_map` CHANGE domain domain CHAR(96) NOT NULL;
 * ALTER TABLE `lastauth` CHANGE domain domain CHAR(96) NOT NULL;
 * ALTER TABLE `valias` CHANGE domain domain CHAR(96) NOT NULL;
 * ALTER TABLE `vlog` CHANGE domain domain CHAR(96) NOT NULL;
 * ALTER TABLE `vpopmail` CHANGE domain domain CHAR(96) NOT NULL;
 * ALTER TABLE `limits` CHANGE domain domain CHAR(96) NOT NULL,
 * ADD `disable_spamassassin` TINYINT(1) DEFAULT 0 NOT NULL AFTER 
`disable_smtp`,
 * ADD `delete_spam` TINYINT(1) DEFAULT 0 NOT NULL AFTER 
`disable_spamassassin`;
 * 
 * 
 * Newer versions of vpopmail contain a quota daemon called vusaged.
 * This ebuild DOES NOT INSTALL vusaged and has therefore disabled
 * its usage in /etc/vusagec.conf. DO NOT ENABLE!
 * Otherwise mail delivery WILL BREAK
 * 
 Unpacking source...
 Unpacking vpopmail-5.4.33.tar.gz to 
 /var/tmp/portage/net-mail/vpopmail-5.4.33-r1/work
 Source unpacked in /var/tmp/portage/net-mail/vpopmail-5.4.33-r1/work
 Preparing source in 
 /var/tmp/portage/net-mail/vpopmail-5.4.33-r1/work/vpopmail-5.4.33 ...
 * Applying vpopmail-5.4.9-access.violation.patch ...   

  [ ok ]
 * Applying vpopmail-lazy.patch ... 

  [ ok ]
 * Applying vpopmail-double-free.patch ...  

  [ ok ]
 * Applying vpopmail-vpgsql.patch ...   

  [ ok ]
 * Running eautoreconf in 
'/var/tmp/portage/net-mail/vpopmail-5.4.33-r1/work/vpopmail-5.4.33' ...
 * Running aclocal ...  

  [ ok ]
 * Running autoconf ... 

  [ ok ]
 * Running autoheader ...   

  [ ok ]
 * Running automake --add-missing --copy --foreign --force-missing ...  

  [ ok ]
 * Running elibtoolize in: vpopmail-5.4.33/
 *   Applying ltmain/1.5 patch ...
 *   Applying portage/1.5.10 patch ...
 *   Applying relink/1.4.1 patch ...
 *   Applying sed/1.5.6 patch ...
 *   Applying as-needed/1.5 patch ...
 * Running elibtoolize in: vpopmail-5.4.33/vusaged/
 * Replacing obsolete head/tail with POSIX compliant ones
 *  - fixed cdb/Makefile
 Source prepared.
 Configuring source in 
 /var/tmp/portage/net-mail/vpopmail-5.4.33-r1/work/vpopmail-5.4.33 ...
 * Setting VPOP_HOME to: /var/vpopmail
 * econf: updating vpopmail-5.4.33/config.guess with 
/usr/share/gnuconfig/config.guess
 * econf: updating vpopmail-5.4.33/config.sub with 
/usr/share/gnuconfig/config.sub
./configure --prefix=/usr --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu 
--host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info 
--datadir=/usr/share --sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var/lib 
--disable-dependency-tracking --disable-silent-rules --libdir=/usr/lib64 
--enable-incdir=/usr/include/mysql 

[vchkpw] fetchmail vpopmail

[Rafał Michalak]

Hello when I fetch mails i've got
mail is looping

but only in one case

poll imap.gmail.com protocol imap service 993:
  user user@domain pass password is user@domain here
fetchall idle ssl;

but when I change user in is section (of course not alias to user) to
other is working great

vpopmail dont like getting mail from this user to the same user ?

How to fix it ?


!DSPAM:5478f49341241785587260!

Re: [vchkpw] minimum password length/character combination support?

[Nikolay Mitev]

Hello,

I tested the patch, but an error occurs for qmailadmin-1.2.16-0.el6.x86_64.
Could there be a new version of this patch.

Best regards,
Nikolay

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Tom Collins t...@tomlogic.com wrote:

 Sorry, forgot the link to the QmailAdmin patch:
 http://sourceforge.net/p/qmailadmin/patches/28/

 -Tom


 On Oct 29, 2014, at 4:32 PM, Tom Collins wrote:

 I haven't checked the configuration in some time, so I don't know about
 minimum password requirements.

 I did recall this patch on SourceForge to call out to cracklib and require
 a strong password.

 If you're comfortable with Javascript, you could modify the change
 password screen to dynamically update a password status (weak, strong,
 secure) and only enable the change button when both password fields match
 and meet minimum password requirements.

 -Tom


 On Oct 29, 2014, at 11:08 AM, pbre...@purplecat.net 
 pbre...@purplecat.net wrote:

 Tom,

 Thanks for the reply.  Of course, sorry for the naïve query.  Yes we use
 qmailadmin to allow password changes by end users.

 And we’ve just found a writeup here:

 http://mugurel.sumanariu.ro/qmail/qmailadmin-check-if-password-is-strong-enough/
 but it seems a little dodgy.

 There isn’t by any chance a build time variable for qmail admin or
 something a little more within the source tree than the above patch method?

 Thanks again for your reply.


 Sincerely,

 Peter Brezny
 Purplecat Networks Inc.
 www.purplecat.net
 828-250-9446

 *From:* Tom Collins t...@tomlogic.com
 *Sent:* ‎Wednesday‎, ‎October‎ ‎29‎, ‎2014 ‎1‎:‎56‎ ‎PM
 *To:* vchkpw@inter7.com

 The vchkpw program verifies the password.  Are you wondering about the
 vpasswd program for changing a password?  That's an admin program, and
 wouldn't typically enforce a password change policy.

 How do your users currently change their passwords?  QmailAdmin?  Some
 other program?  You would have to incorporate password requirements into
 that program, and not the one that validates a password.

 -Tom


 On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:42 AM, Peter Brezny wrote:
  Dear vchkpw@inter7.com,
 
  Is there a way to enforce a minimum length and character combination
  (letters, numbers, upper case) with vchkpw and if not, are there patches
 or
  external applications that integrate well with vchkpw to get this
  functionality?






 



!DSPAM:54551c6e26513275391490!

[vchkpw] minimum password length/character combination support?

[Peter Brezny]

Dear vchkpw@inter7.com,

Is there a way to enforce a minimum length and character combination
(letters, numbers, upper case) with vchkpw and if not, are there patches or
external applications that integrate well with vchkpw to get this
functionality?


Sincerely,

Peter Brezny
Purplecat Networks, Inc.
www.purplecat.net









!DSPAM:5450fc0226519445114555!

Re: [vchkpw] minimum password length/character combination support?

[Tom Collins]

The vchkpw program verifies the password.  Are you wondering about the vpasswd 
program for changing a password?  That's an admin program, and wouldn't 
typically enforce a password change policy.

How do your users currently change their passwords?  QmailAdmin?  Some other 
program?  You would have to incorporate password requirements into that 
program, and not the one that validates a password.

-Tom


On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:42 AM, Peter Brezny wrote:
 Dear vchkpw@inter7.com,
 
 Is there a way to enforce a minimum length and character combination
 (letters, numbers, upper case) with vchkpw and if not, are there patches or
 external applications that integrate well with vchkpw to get this
 functionality?


!DSPAM:54512a5f26519256121473!

Re: [vchkpw] minimum password length/character combination support?

[Tom Collins]

I haven't checked the configuration in some time, so I don't know about minimum 
password requirements.

I did recall this patch on SourceForge to call out to cracklib and require a 
strong password.

If you're comfortable with Javascript, you could modify the change password 
screen to dynamically update a password status (weak, strong, secure) and only 
enable the change button when both password fields match and meet minimum 
password requirements.

-Tom


On Oct 29, 2014, at 11:08 AM, pbre...@purplecat.net pbre...@purplecat.net 
wrote:

 Tom,
 
 Thanks for the reply.  Of course, sorry for the naïve query.  Yes we use 
 qmailadmin to allow password changes by end users.
 
 And we’ve just found a writeup here:
 http://mugurel.sumanariu.ro/qmail/qmailadmin-check-if-password-is-strong-enough/
 but it seems a little dodgy.
 
 There isn’t by any chance a build time variable for qmail admin or something 
 a little more within the source tree than the above patch method?
 
 Thanks again for your reply.
 
 
 Sincerely,
 
 Peter Brezny
 Purplecat Networks Inc.
 www.purplecat.net
 828-250-9446
 
 From: Tom Collins
 Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎October‎ ‎29‎, ‎2014 ‎1‎:‎56‎ ‎PM
 To: vchkpw@inter7.com
 
 The vchkpw program verifies the password.  Are you wondering about the 
 vpasswd program for changing a password?  That's an admin program, and 
 wouldn't typically enforce a password change policy.
 
 How do your users currently change their passwords?  QmailAdmin?  Some other 
 program?  You would have to incorporate password requirements into that 
 program, and not the one that validates a password.
 
 -Tom
 
 
 On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:42 AM, Peter Brezny wrote:
  Dear vchkpw@inter7.com,
  
  Is there a way to enforce a minimum length and character combination
  (letters, numbers, upper case) with vchkpw and if not, are there patches or
  external applications that integrate well with vchkpw to get this
  functionality?
 
 
 
 
 



!DSPAM:5451791d26511096114170!

Re: [vchkpw] minimum password length/character combination support?

[Tom Collins]

Sorry, forgot the link to the QmailAdmin patch: 
http://sourceforge.net/p/qmailadmin/patches/28/

-Tom


On Oct 29, 2014, at 4:32 PM, Tom Collins wrote:

 I haven't checked the configuration in some time, so I don't know about 
 minimum password requirements.
 
 I did recall this patch on SourceForge to call out to cracklib and require a 
 strong password.
 
 If you're comfortable with Javascript, you could modify the change password 
 screen to dynamically update a password status (weak, strong, secure) and 
 only enable the change button when both password fields match and meet 
 minimum password requirements.
 
 -Tom
 
 
 On Oct 29, 2014, at 11:08 AM, pbre...@purplecat.net pbre...@purplecat.net 
 wrote:
 
 Tom,
 
 Thanks for the reply.  Of course, sorry for the naïve query.  Yes we use 
 qmailadmin to allow password changes by end users.
 
 And we’ve just found a writeup here:
 http://mugurel.sumanariu.ro/qmail/qmailadmin-check-if-password-is-strong-enough/
 but it seems a little dodgy.
 
 There isn’t by any chance a build time variable for qmail admin or something 
 a little more within the source tree than the above patch method?
 
 Thanks again for your reply.
 
 
 Sincerely,
 
 Peter Brezny
 Purplecat Networks Inc.
 www.purplecat.net
 828-250-9446
 
 From: Tom Collins
 Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎October‎ ‎29‎, ‎2014 ‎1‎:‎56‎ ‎PM
 To: vchkpw@inter7.com
 
 The vchkpw program verifies the password.  Are you wondering about the 
 vpasswd program for changing a password?  That's an admin program, and 
 wouldn't typically enforce a password change policy.
 
 How do your users currently change their passwords?  QmailAdmin?  Some other 
 program?  You would have to incorporate password requirements into that 
 program, and not the one that validates a password.
 
 -Tom
 
 
 On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:42 AM, Peter Brezny wrote:
  Dear vchkpw@inter7.com,
  
  Is there a way to enforce a minimum length and character combination
  (letters, numbers, upper case) with vchkpw and if not, are there patches or
  external applications that integrate well with vchkpw to get this
  functionality?
 
 
 
 
 
 



!DSPAM:54517a3626514956617183!

[vchkpw] vdelivermail writes the wrong ,S= value when spamassassin is enabled

[Rolf Eike Beer]

Hi,

my setup is as follows: I use Qsmtp[1] to do the SMTP part, use (net)qmail for
the queueing, use vpopmail 5.4.33 for the user/domain stuff. The users get
their mail through IMAP or POP using dovecot. For some users I have maildrop
and/or spamassassin enabled.

When spamassassin is enabled but maildrop is not I see failed assertions in
dovecots POP server[2], which are caused by vdelivermail using a wrong
filename. The filename, more exactly the S=size value is calculated _before_
the mail is piped into spamassassin, which adds two more header lines with
it's scan results, so the actual size afterwards is bigger than what is
recorded. The attached patch #5 fixes this for me, with some cleanups in #1-#4
I did on the way to find the culprit.

Also attached is another patch I on my server to make the user and domain
directories world-accessible so the incoming SMTP process can read config
files from the user and domain directories for user-defined filtering. The
maildirs itself are still 0700 so it has no access to them.

While talking about patches, here are the patches that Gentoo applies to
vpopmail, which may or may not be useful for being taken upstream:
http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/net-mail/vpopmail/files/

Eike

1) shameless plug: http://opensource.sf-tec.de/Qsmtp/
2) http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2014-August/097548.htmlFrom e402c2f49b25d78af3e9ee90b030678972294755 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Rolf Eike Beer k...@opensource.sf-tec.de
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:34:27 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] vdelivermail: add static

---
 vdelivermail.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/vdelivermail.c b/vdelivermail.c
index d94129f..241106e 100644
--- a/vdelivermail.c
+++ b/vdelivermail.c
@@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ int process_valias(void)
 #endif

 /* Forks off qmail-inject.  Returns PID of child, or 0 for failure. */
-pid_t qmail_inject_open(char *address)
+static pid_t qmail_inject_open(char *address)
 {
  int pim[2];
  pid_t pid;
@@ -351,7 +351,7 @@ pid_t qmail_inject_open(char *address)
 return(pid);
 }

-int fdcopy (int write_fd, int read_fd, const char *extra_headers, size_t headerlen, char *address)
+static int fdcopy (int write_fd, int read_fd, const char *extra_headers, size_t headerlen, char *address)
 {
   char msgbuf[4096];
   ssize_t file_count;
--
1.8.4.5

From af7e1c5ede39340e12f93253b6a53f5459c97900 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Rolf Eike Beer k...@opensource.sf-tec.de
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:36:36 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/5] fix those vfork() instances that do more than exec*()

---
 vdelivermail.c | 4 ++--
 vpopmail.c | 8 
 vqmaillocal.c  | 2 +-
 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/vdelivermail.c b/vdelivermail.c
index 241106e..be83a2a 100644
--- a/vdelivermail.c
+++ b/vdelivermail.c
@@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ static pid_t qmail_inject_open(char *address)

 if ( pipe(pim) == -1) return 0;

-switch(pid=vfork()){
+switch(pid=fork()){
   case -1:
 close(pim[0]);
 close(pim[1]);
@@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ static int fdcopy (int write_fd, int read_fd, const char *extra_headers, size_t
!(vpw-pw_gid  NO_SPAMASSASSIN) ) {

 if (!pipe(pim)) {
-  pid = vfork();
+  pid = fork();
   switch (pid) {
case -1:
 close(pim[0]);
diff --git a/vpopmail.c b/vpopmail.c
index a2bdc0b..7a4657f 100644
--- a/vpopmail.c
+++ b/vpopmail.c
@@ -1472,9 +1472,9 @@ int update_newu()
 {
  int pid;

-  pid=vfork();
+  pid=fork();
   if ( pid==0){
-			  umask(022);
+umask(022);
 execl(QMAILNEWU,qmail-newu, NULL);
 exit(127);
   } else {
@@ -3360,9 +3360,9 @@ long unsigned tcprules_open()
   /* create a pair of filedescriptors for our pipe */
   if (pipe(pim) == -1)  { return(-1);}

-  switch( pid=vfork()){
+  switch( pid=fork()){
case -1:
-/* vfork error. close pipes and exit */
+/* fork error. close pipes and exit */
 close(pim[0]); close(pim[1]);
 return(-1);
case 0:
diff --git a/vqmaillocal.c b/vqmaillocal.c
index 6d3068c..80efa24 100644
--- a/vqmaillocal.c
+++ b/vqmaillocal.c
@@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ long unsigned qmail_inject_open(char *address)

 if ( pipe(pim) == -1) return(-1);

-switch(pid=vfork()){
+switch(pid=fork()){
 case -1:
 close(pim[0]);
 close(pim[1]);
--
1.8.4.5

From 88d305d9f072639ed4bc2705b46708e706a50ffc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Rolf Eike Beer k...@opensource.sf-tec.de
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:45:28 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 3/5] remove unneeded forward declaration

---
 vchkpw.c | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/vchkpw.c b/vchkpw.c
index b1c8a5d..d7d4351 100644
--- a/vchkpw.c
+++ b/vchkpw.c
@@ -91,7 +91,6 @@ void login_system_user();
 void read_user_pass();
 void vlog(int verror, char *TheUser, char *TheDomain, char *ThePass, char *TheName, char *IpAddr, char *LogLine);
 void vchkpw_exit(int err);

Re: [vchkpw] Re: qmailadmin and forwards

[Laurent Bercot]

On 01/09/2014 03:11, Eric Shubert wrote:

Does anyone have any insight or recommendations for how to best use
dovecot's LDA along with vpopmail and qmail? QMT already uses dovecot
for imap and pop3 services. We're simply looking to take the next
logical step.


 Not answering your question, but:
 I use vpopmail with dovecot too, and it works flawlessly without
using the dovecot LDA. What would be the benefit of using the
dovecot LDA since you have to go through vdelivermail anyway ?
It adds a step, which has a cost; to be worth it, the benefits have
to outweigh that cost.

--
 Laurent


!DSPAM:54042ee156441333813399!

[vchkpw] Re: qmailadmin and forwards

[Eric Shubert]

On 09/01/2014 01:31 AM, Laurent Bercot wrote:

On 01/09/2014 03:11, Eric Shubert wrote:

Does anyone have any insight or recommendations for how to best use
dovecot's LDA along with vpopmail and qmail? QMT already uses dovecot
for imap and pop3 services. We're simply looking to take the next
logical step.


  Not answering your question, but:
  I use vpopmail with dovecot too, and it works flawlessly without
using the dovecot LDA. What would be the benefit of using the
dovecot LDA since you have to go through vdelivermail anyway ?
It adds a step, which has a cost; to be worth it, the benefits have
to outweigh that cost.



The benefit is sieve, which provides server side filtering. With the use 
of multiple (imap) mail clients (phones, tablets, etc), having the 
server do the filtering/filing of messages makes good sense. I don't 
think having the messages pass through vpopmail as well as deliver would 
impact performance all that much. If that's what it takes, to me I 
expect it'd be worth it.


--
-Eric 'shubes'


!DSPAM:540484f856446821598672!

[vchkpw] Re: qmailadmin and forwards

[Eric Shubert]

On 08/28/2014 10:26 AM, Laurent Bercot wrote:

On 08/28/2014 02:26 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:

Thanks for this explanation Rick. Now knowing how this actually works, I
think I'll join you in being peeved about it. Not knowing any better, I
would have presumed that the user d-q files would have been processed
before the domain d-q files. Makes me wonder what the rationale is/was
for processing the domain files first.


  It has to do with the way vpopmail uses qmail hooks to do its job.
When you create the example.com domain, vpopmail modifies the
/var/qmail/users/assign database so that qmail-local delivers the mail
according to the instructions in ~/vpopmail/domains/example.com .
So what reads your .qmail-* files in the domain directory is not
vdelivermail, it's simply qmail-local.

  What vpopmail does is put a vdelivermail invocation in .qmail-default
in the domain directory. vdelivermail then extracts the user name,
looks it up in its vpasswd database to find the correct directory
(most of the time ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/user) and delivers the
mail according to the instructions in that directory.

  If you put a .qmail file in the domain directory, that takes precedence
over .qmail-default, then vdelivermail will be bypassed entirely. So
don't do that - let vpopmail do its black magic on the domain directory
and only use user directories to put your .qmail files into.

  There are 2 things I'm not satisfied with, but they have nothing to do
with the domain-wide .qmail files.
  The first thing is that vdelivermail duplicates most of the work of
qmail-local for parsing .qmail files. It would be much more elegant to
have vdelivermail just perform the vpopmail-specific stuff (extract user
name, check the vpasswd database, go to user directory) then exec into
qmail-local itself.
  The second thing is that vdelivermail does not make all the black
magic transparent: the .qmail files in a user directory cannot be
written exactly as if the user was a system user instead of a vpopmail
user. I have a program, vsanitize, to be called in .qmail files
in vpopmail user directories, that moves around a few environment
variables to provide such transparency.



Thanks to you too, Laurent.

Please forgive me for asking the following question before thoroughly 
thinking through the process.


We (the QMT community) are interested in replacing vdelivermail with 
dovecot's LDA deliver. This will be used in conjunction with sieve for 
server-side filtering.


I gather from what you've said that deliver would be plugging into the 
domain's .qmail-default file, instead of vpopmail. In that case, deliver 
would be responsible for all forwarding as well, which I'm not sure it 
can handle. I haven't really looked into the details of this much yet.


Does anyone have any insight or recommendations for how to best use 
dovecot's LDA along with vpopmail and qmail? QMT already uses dovecot 
for imap and pop3 services. We're simply looking to take the next 
logical step.


Thanks everyone for your insights.

--
-Eric 'shubes'


!DSPAM:5403d29556441754111094!

[vchkpw] Re: qmailadmin and forwards

[Eric Shubert]

On 08/31/2014 06:57 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:

On 08/28/2014 10:26 AM, Laurent Bercot wrote:

On 08/28/2014 02:26 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:

Thanks for this explanation Rick. Now knowing how this actually works, I
think I'll join you in being peeved about it. Not knowing any better, I
would have presumed that the user d-q files would have been processed
before the domain d-q files. Makes me wonder what the rationale is/was
for processing the domain files first.


  It has to do with the way vpopmail uses qmail hooks to do its job.
When you create the example.com domain, vpopmail modifies the
/var/qmail/users/assign database so that qmail-local delivers the mail
according to the instructions in ~/vpopmail/domains/example.com .
So what reads your .qmail-* files in the domain directory is not
vdelivermail, it's simply qmail-local.

  What vpopmail does is put a vdelivermail invocation in .qmail-default
in the domain directory. vdelivermail then extracts the user name,
looks it up in its vpasswd database to find the correct directory
(most of the time ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/user) and delivers the
mail according to the instructions in that directory.

  If you put a .qmail file in the domain directory, that takes precedence
over .qmail-default, then vdelivermail will be bypassed entirely. So
don't do that - let vpopmail do its black magic on the domain directory
and only use user directories to put your .qmail files into.

  There are 2 things I'm not satisfied with, but they have nothing to do
with the domain-wide .qmail files.
  The first thing is that vdelivermail duplicates most of the work of
qmail-local for parsing .qmail files. It would be much more elegant to
have vdelivermail just perform the vpopmail-specific stuff (extract user
name, check the vpasswd database, go to user directory) then exec into
qmail-local itself.
  The second thing is that vdelivermail does not make all the black
magic transparent: the .qmail files in a user directory cannot be
written exactly as if the user was a system user instead of a vpopmail
user. I have a program, vsanitize, to be called in .qmail files
in vpopmail user directories, that moves around a few environment
variables to provide such transparency.



Thanks to you too, Laurent.

Please forgive me for asking the following question before thoroughly
thinking through the process.

We (the QMT community) are interested in replacing vdelivermail with
dovecot's LDA deliver. This will be used in conjunction with sieve for
server-side filtering.

I gather from what you've said that deliver would be plugging into the
domain's .qmail-default file, instead of vpopmail. In that case, deliver
would be responsible for all forwarding as well, which I'm not sure it
can handle. I haven't really looked into the details of this much yet.

Does anyone have any insight or recommendations for how to best use
dovecot's LDA along with vpopmail and qmail? QMT already uses dovecot
for imap and pop3 services. We're simply looking to take the next
logical step.

Thanks everyone for your insights.



Ok, so I did a (very) little digging. It appears that deliver relies on 
Pigeonhole/Sieve for forwarding rules. I think I'd like to keep the 
existing vpopmail forwarding setup for the time being, so now the 
question becomes, what's the best way to configure vdelivermail to use 
dovecot's deliver to handle the actual local delivery. I'm guessing now 
that it should be specified in each (and every) user's .qmail-default 
file, where maildrop is presently hooked in.


Any thoughts on this? I expect I'll need to modify a few vpopmail and 
qmailadmin modules to make this happen.


Thanks for any thoughts on this.

--
-Eric 'shubes'


!DSPAM:5403d5df56441597863918!

Re: [vchkpw] qmailadmin and forwards

[Laurent Bercot]

On 08/28/2014 02:26 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:

Thanks for this explanation Rick. Now knowing how this actually works, I
think I'll join you in being peeved about it. Not knowing any better, I
would have presumed that the user d-q files would have been processed
before the domain d-q files. Makes me wonder what the rationale is/was
for processing the domain files first.


 It has to do with the way vpopmail uses qmail hooks to do its job.
When you create the example.com domain, vpopmail modifies the
/var/qmail/users/assign database so that qmail-local delivers the mail
according to the instructions in ~/vpopmail/domains/example.com .
So what reads your .qmail-* files in the domain directory is not
vdelivermail, it's simply qmail-local.

 What vpopmail does is put a vdelivermail invocation in .qmail-default
in the domain directory. vdelivermail then extracts the user name,
looks it up in its vpasswd database to find the correct directory
(most of the time ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/user) and delivers the
mail according to the instructions in that directory.

 If you put a .qmail file in the domain directory, that takes precedence
over .qmail-default, then vdelivermail will be bypassed entirely. So
don't do that - let vpopmail do its black magic on the domain directory
and only use user directories to put your .qmail files into.

 There are 2 things I'm not satisfied with, but they have nothing to do
with the domain-wide .qmail files.
 The first thing is that vdelivermail duplicates most of the work of
qmail-local for parsing .qmail files. It would be much more elegant to
have vdelivermail just perform the vpopmail-specific stuff (extract user
name, check the vpasswd database, go to user directory) then exec into
qmail-local itself.
 The second thing is that vdelivermail does not make all the black
magic transparent: the .qmail files in a user directory cannot be
written exactly as if the user was a system user instead of a vpopmail
user. I have a program, vsanitize, to be called in .qmail files
in vpopmail user directories, that moves around a few environment
variables to provide such transparency.

--
 Laurent

!DSPAM:54008ad456445328810183!

Re: [vchkpw] qmailadmin and forwards

[Rick Widmer]

One thing to remember, and one of my pet peeves...

Out of all of the files in ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/ only one, 
.qmail-default has anything to do with the vpopmail delivery process.


When qmail-local tries to deliver a message to the domain it looks at 
all of the .qmail-* files in the domain directory, and processes the 
.qmail* file that best matches the incoming address.  If no other .qmail 
file matches .qmail-default is processed, which is where vdelivermail 
gets control.



see:man dot-qmail


.qmail files in ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/username will be handled 
by vdelivermail depending on compiler options.


Vpopmail and qmailadmin do manage the .qmail files in the domain 
directory, but during the delivery process qmail does not pass control 
to vpopmail unless none of the other .qmail files match.


!DSPAM:53fecb3a56448570372193!

Re: [vchkpw] qmailadmin and forwards

[Eric Shubert]

On 08/27/2014 11:24 PM, Rick Widmer wrote:

One thing to remember, and one of my pet peeves...

Out of all of the files in ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/ only one, 
.qmail-default has anything to do with the vpopmail delivery process.


When qmail-local tries to deliver a message to the domain it looks at 
all of the .qmail-* files in the domain directory, and processes the 
.qmail* file that best matches the incoming address.  If no other 
.qmail file matches .qmail-default is processed, which is where 
vdelivermail gets control.



see:man dot-qmail


.qmail files in ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/username will be handled 
by vdelivermail depending on compiler options.


Vpopmail and qmailadmin do manage the .qmail files in the domain 
directory, but during the delivery process qmail does not pass control 
to vpopmail unless none of the other .qmail files match.




Thanks for this explanation Rick. Now knowing how this actually works, I 
think I'll join you in being peeved about it. Not knowing any better, I 
would have presumed that the user d-q files would have been processed 
before the domain d-q files. Makes me wonder what the rationale is/was 
for processing the domain files first.


--
-Eric 'shubes'


!DSPAM:53ff2e0956448319919131!

Re: [vchkpw] qmailadmin and forwards

[Rick Widmer]

On 8/28/2014 7:26 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:

On 08/27/2014 11:24 PM, Rick Widmer wrote:

One thing to remember, and one of my pet peeves...

Out of all of the files in ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/ only one,
.qmail-default has anything to do with the vpopmail delivery process.

When qmail-local tries to deliver a message to the domain it looks at
all of the .qmail-* files in the domain directory, and processes the
.qmail* file that best matches the incoming address.  If no other
.qmail file matches .qmail-default is processed, which is where
vdelivermail gets control.


see:man dot-qmail


.qmail files in ~vpopmail/domains/example.com/username will be handled
by vdelivermail depending on compiler options.

Vpopmail and qmailadmin do manage the .qmail files in the domain
directory, but during the delivery process qmail does not pass control
to vpopmail unless none of the other .qmail files match.




Thanks for this explanation Rick. Now knowing how this actually works, I
think I'll join you in being peeved about it. Not knowing any better, I
would have presumed that the user d-q files would have been processed
before the domain d-q files. Makes me wonder what the rationale is/was
for processing the domain files first.



You don't know it is a user until you have verified the incoming address 
does not match any aliases or mailing lists.


Actually I consider the way it works to be an elegant design. You use 
the standard facilities in qmail to handle the domain directory, and 
only fire up vdelivermail to lookup individual users and forwards within 
the domain.  This is especially important for mailing lists because 
ezmlm and qmail are tightly coupled.


What I am peeved about was people on the qmail list complaining about 
the 'strange' way that vpopmail handles .qmail files, or wanting them to 
be renamed to .vpopmail files when the fact of the matter is that qmail 
only hands off delivery for individual users after qmail-local can't 
find any matching .qmail files in the domain directory.  (.qmail-default)


The humorous part is that the 'strange' behavior they complain about is 
the standard behavior of qmail and vpopmail may not be involved in the 
delivery at all.  (Aliases and mailing lists are controlled by the 
.qmail files in the domain directory.)


!DSPAM:53ff7e7856441903219601!

Re: [vchkpw] qmailadmin and forwards

[Tom Collins]

Rick,

At issue was that qmail only processes the .qmail-alias files in the domain 
directory.  It then hands off to vdelivermail via the .qmail-default file in 
the domain directory.

The vdelivermail program is what parses the user/.qmail file for delivery 
instructions.  While that file follows the same format as other .qmail-alias 
files, I would agree that it would have been clearer to use .vpopmail as the 
filename so users would know that the qmail programs weren't responsible for 
processing it.  If we had remained true to the qmail way, shouldn't it have 
been user/.qmail-default and supported user/.qmail-alias files to handle 
email addressed to user-al...@example.com?

-Tom


On Aug 28, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Rick Widmer wrote:

 What I am peeved about was people on the qmail list complaining about the 
 'strange' way that vpopmail handles .qmail files, or wanting them to be 
 renamed to .vpopmail files when the fact of the matter is that qmail only 
 hands off delivery for individual users after qmail-local can't find any 
 matching .qmail files in the domain directory. (.qmail-default)
 
 The humorous part is that the 'strange' behavior they complain about is the 
 standard behavior of qmail and vpopmail may not be involved in the delivery 
 at all.  (Aliases and mailing lists are controlled by the .qmail files in the 
 domain directory.)


!DSPAM:53ffc37156441140448696!

[vchkpw] Re: qmailadmin and forwards

[Eric Shubert]

On 08/25/2014 05:48 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:

I block the spam before it enters the system using simscan.

Thanks - not an option here since I need to allow users to opt in or out, etc.


The simcontrol file allows you to customize settings per email address. 
I presume that this would be the initial (forward) address, since the 
true destination wouldn't be available yet at that point.


--
-Eric 'shubes'


!DSPAM:53fde4ac5644185827!

Re: [vchkpw] qmailadmin and forwards

[Charles Sprickman]

On Aug 27, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net wrote:

 On 08/25/2014 05:48 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
 I block the spam before it enters the system using simscan.
 Thanks - not an option here since I need to allow users to opt in or out, 
 etc.
 
 The simcontrol file allows you to customize settings per email address. I 
 presume that this would be the initial (forward) address, since the true 
 destination wouldn't be available yet at that point.

The issue with that is we already have a bunch of stuff in webmail and internal 
web apps that deal with per-user settings and such (including some neat 
postscreen things for when I finish standing Postfix up in front of the primary 
mxer), so switching scanning is not really an option.

All alias/forward traffic seems to find its way to qmail via vdelivermail 
piping it to qmail-inject, so I put a wrapper in place of qmail-inject last 
night and that’s looking good.  It’s just a shell script, and it’s a bit hokey, 
but the volume on forwards/aliases is about 5% of our total volume.

Basically it makes a few decisions:

• Is the calling UID 89?  If not, throw the message to real qmail-inject 
immediately
• If it is UID 89, is this offsite or local final delivery?  If local, throw 
message to qmail-inject
• If it is UID 89 and offsite, pipe through spamc to temporary file, look at 
exit status of spamc. If it’s spam, discard, exit 0.  If it’s not spam, read 
the file into qmail-inject

So far so good.  It’s really hackish though.

Charles

 
 -- 
 -Eric 'shubes'
 
 
 
 


!DSPAM:53fdfe8556446577118687!

Re: [vchkpw] qmailadmin and forwards

[Tom Collins]

Charles,

It's been a long time since I've worked in that code, but here are some quick 
thoughts:

1) There's already code reading the headers, searching for mail loops by 
looking at the Delivered-To header.  You could tap into that code.

2) You could look at simscan.c to see how they're interfacing with spamc.

-Tom


On Aug 25, 2014, at 5:48 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
 Off to try to follow vdelivermail.c…  :)


!DSPAM:53fc20e356441762611622!

Re: [vchkpw] maildirsize is recalculated too often

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Thanks, Teodor!  I'll take a look at this.

On 07/03/2014 10:36 AM, Teodor Milkov wrote:
 Hi,
 
 After upgrading to vpopmail 5.4.33 I started seeing much more IO requests. I 
 see that in 5.4.32
 the following code was added to maildirquota.c:
 
 /* Maildir++ specification says to rebuild the maildirsize file if the file 
 is 5120 or more
 bytes, or is more than 15 minutes old */
 
 ret = fstat(f, statptr); if ((ret != -1)  ((statptr-st_size = 5120) || 
 (time(NULL) 
 statptr-st_mtime + (15*60 { unlink(filename); close(f); return -1; }
 
 I think this is not correct interpretation of the specs from 
 www.courier-mta.org/imap/README.maildirquota.html which says:
 
 /If the numbers we got indicated that the Maildir++ *is over quota*, some 
 additional logic is in 
 order: if we did not recalculate //maildirsize//, if the numbers in 
 //maildirsize//indicated that
 we are over quota, then if //maildirsize//was more than one line long, or if 
 the timestamp on 
 //maildirsize//indicated that it's at least 15 minutes old, throw out the 
 totals, and
 recalculate //maildirsize//from scratch./
 
 I.e. the 15 minute logic should be applied only if the Maildir is currently 
 over quota. This
 logic was already implemented in maildirquota.c dockeckquota() where it says 
 if
 (maildirsize_nlines == 1  tm  stat_buf.st_mtime + 15*60), but it didn't 
 work, because
 /stat_buf/ is not set in maildirsize_read().
 
 Please find attached a patch against 5.4.33, which I'm using in production. 
 In addition to the
 minimal fix (initializing stat_buf) it has some documentation as well as some 
 magic numbers
 converted to constants ? feel free to use it however you like.


- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com   GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTw/xQAAoJEOjQVexigXNzIGgIAJ7xmjrH4akfNHAKdtRo96GN
814Jsf1zeDREr0tg5RHwGYzSMTOUwJo1Lb9EoJmMuqtkDcjS3msrIY01XKvAC4aO
RlRquev2bwwMHGBe1xuCPabNe0M2U29u5imOhbpFtxTDzjdvnjULkmSuCbieO61F
tzvhAIlIs/MGECJd1u7AMmeBaEWSZmMjFX6xmXE8NIbTRz1aqHfc8AUNGO7JF3Hh
JhL6KXwioCm81BC3zck1Oxb3Z+m+FQBsdCFbx6LcVPoLa/KR+eAoDZDrt513h8Xf
iGHUkE0IRzWjeDWzkrG4kRkYpeK0g0CCIESsqh8iZSC1RR5mA4++IwJXkRzhE4k=
=pHND
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[vchkpw] maildirsize is recalculated too often

[Teodor Milkov]

Hi,

After upgrading to vpopmail 5.4.33 I started seeing much more IO 
requests. I see that in 5.4.32 the following code was added to 
maildirquota.c:


 /*
  Maildir++ specification says to rebuild the maildirsize file if the
  file is 5120 or more bytes, or is more than 15 minutes old
  */

 ret = fstat(f, statptr);
 if ((ret != -1)  ((statptr-st_size = 5120) || (time(NULL)  
statptr-st_mtime + (15*60 {

unlink(filename);
close(f);
return -1;
 }

I think this is not correct interpretation of the specs from 
www.courier-mta.org/imap/README.maildirquota.html which says:


/If the numbers we got indicated that the Maildir++ *is over quota*, 
some additional logic is in order: if we did not recalculate 
//maildirsize//, if the numbers in //maildirsize//indicated that we are 
over quota, then if //maildirsize//was more than one line long, or if 
the timestamp on //maildirsize//indicated that it's at least 15 minutes 
old, throw out the totals, and recalculate //maildirsize//from scratch./


I.e. the 15 minute logic should be applied only if the Maildir is 
currently over quota. This logic was already implemented in 
maildirquota.c dockeckquota() where it says if (maildirsize_nlines == 1 
 tm  stat_buf.st_mtime + 15*60), but it didn't work, because 
/stat_buf/ is not set in maildirsize_read().


Please find attached a patch against 5.4.33, which I'm using in 
production. In addition to the minimal fix (initializing stat_buf) it 
has some documentation as well as some magic numbers converted to 
constants -- feel free to use it however you like.



Best regards,
Teodor


!DSPAM:53b571086521514644!
diff -Nru vpopmail-5.4.33.orig/maildirquota.h vpopmail-5.4.33/maildirquota.h
--- vpopmail-5.4.33.orig/maildirquota.h	2011-02-28 19:00:45.0 +0200
+++ vpopmail-5.4.33/maildirquota.h	2014-07-03 18:09:48.0 +0300
@@ -12,6 +12,10 @@
 
 #define QUOTA_WARN_PERCENT 90
 
+/* http://www.courier-mta.org/imap/README.maildirquota.html */
+#define MAILDIRSIZE_OVERLEN 5120
+#define MAILDIRSIZE_OLD_SECS 15*60
+
 /* I've removed pretty much the whole file execept for
some public functions so as to not conflict with courier.
Ive made the courier functions static.
diff -Nru vpopmail-5.4.33.orig/maildirquota.c vpopmail-5.4.33/maildirquota.c
--- vpopmail-5.4.33.orig/maildirquota.c	2011-02-28 19:00:45.0 +0200
+++ vpopmail-5.4.33/maildirquota.c	2014-07-03 18:14:54.0 +0300
@@ -333,7 +333,7 @@
 	unsigned *nlines, /* # of lines in maildirsize */
 	struct stat *statptr)	/* The stats on maildirsize */
 {
- char buf[5120];
+ char buf[MAILDIRSIZE_OVERLEN];
  int f;
  char *p;
  unsigned l;
@@ -343,21 +343,13 @@
 
 	if ((f=maildir_safeopen(filename, O_RDWR|O_APPEND, 0))  0)
 		return (-1);
+
+	if (fstat(f, statptr)  0)
+		return (-1);
+
 	p=buf;
 	l=sizeof(buf);
 
-	/*
-		 Maildir++ specification says to rebuild the maildirsize file if the
-		 file is 5120 or more bytes, or is more than 15 minutes old
-*/
-
-	ret = fstat(f, statptr);
-	if ((ret != -1)  ((statptr-st_size = 5120) || (time(NULL)  statptr-st_mtime + (15*60 {
-	   unlink(filename);
-	   close(f);
-	   return -1;
-}
-
 	while (l)
 	{
 		n=read(f, p, l);
@@ -409,6 +401,17 @@
 	return (0);
 }
 
+/**
+ * Calculate quota usage in percent (%).
+ *
+ * @param[in]  s   Current maildir size in bytes.
+ * @param[in]  n   Current maildir message count.
+ * @param[in]  *quota  Current quota limit, e.g. 1000S or 1000C.
+ * @param[out] *percentage Quota usage in % (the bigger between size  count).
+ *
+ * @retval 0  within quota
+ * @retval -1 over quota
+ */
 static int qcalc(storage_t s, storage_t n, const char *quota, int *percentage)
 {
 storage_t i;
@@ -595,7 +598,7 @@
 		n=qcalc(maildirsize_size+xtra_size, maildirsize_cnt+xtra_cnt,
 			quota_type, percentage);
 
-		if (n == 0)
+		if (n == 0) // within quota
 		{
 			free(checkfolder);
 			*maildirsize_fdptr=maildirsize_fd;
@@ -603,7 +606,16 @@
 		}
 		close(maildirsize_fd);
 
-		if (maildirsize_nlines == 1  tm  stat_buf.st_mtime + 15*60)
+		/*
+		 * http://www.courier-mta.org/imap/README.maildirquota.html
+		 *
+		 * if the numbers in maildirsize indicated that we are over quota,
+		 * then if maildirsize was more than one line long, or if the timestamp
+		 * on maildirsize indicated that it's at least 15 minutes old, throw out
+		 * the totals, and recalculate maildirsize from scratch
+	 */
+		if (maildirsize_nlines == 1 
+			tm  stat_buf.st_mtime + MAILDIRSIZE_OLD_SECS)
 			return (n);
 	}
 

confirm subscribe to vchkpw@inter7.com

[vchkpw-help]

Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
vchkpw@inter7.com mailing list.

I'm working for my owner, who can be reached
at vchkpw-ow...@inter7.com.

To confirm that you would like

   arch...@mail-archive.com

added to the vchkpw mailing list, please send
an empty reply to this address:

   vchkpw-sc.1399787994.imbnhifabmehgpcjalbc-archive=mail-archive@inter7.com

Usually, this happens when you just hit the reply button.
If this does not work, simply copy the address and paste it into
the To: field of a new message.

This confirmation serves two purposes. First, it verifies that I am able
to get mail through to you. Second, it protects you in case someone
forges a subscription request in your name.


--- Administrative commands for the vchkpw list ---

I can handle administrative requests automatically. Please
do not send them to the list address! Instead, send
your message to the correct command address:

For help and a description of available commands, send a message to:
   vchkpw-h...@inter7.com

To subscribe to the list, send a message to:
   vchkpw-subscr...@inter7.com

To remove your address from the list, just send a message to
the address in the ``List-Unsubscribe'' header of any list
message. If you haven't changed addresses since subscribing,
you can also send a message to:
   vchkpw-unsubscr...@inter7.com

For addition or removal of addresses, I'll send a confirmation
message to that address. When you receive it, simply reply to it
to complete the transaction.

If you need to get in touch with the human owner of this list,
please send a message to:

vchkpw-ow...@inter7.com

Please include a FORWARDED list message with ALL HEADERS intact
to make it easier to help you.

--- Enclosed is a copy of the request I received.

Return-Path: arch...@mail-archive.com
Received: (qmail 30662 invoked by uid 0); 11 May 2014 05:59:54 -
Received: from unknown (HELO mail-archive.com) (72.52.77.8)
  by mail.inter7.com with (AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 11 May 2014 05:59:54 
-
Received: from root by mail-archive.com with local (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from arch...@mail-archive.com)
id 1WjMnt-0003jn-4Y
for vchkpw-subscr...@inter7.com; Sat, 10 May 2014 23:00:05 -0700
From: arch...@mail-archive.com
Subject: [SPAM] subscribe
To: vchkpw-subscr...@inter7.com
X-Mailer: mail (GNU Mailutils 2.2)
Message-Id: e1wjmnt-0003jn...@mail-archive.com
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 23:00:05 -0700
X-DSPAM-Result: Spam
X-DSPAM-Processed: Sun May 11 00:59:54 2014
X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.5034
X-DSPAM-Probability: 1.
X-DSPAM-Signature: 536f11da34264733211074
X-DSPAM-Factors: 15,
Received*from+root, 0.99000,
Received*root+by, 0.99000,
To*vchkpw+subscribe, 0.99000,
Received*4Y, 0.99000,
Received*vchkpw+subscribe, 0.99000,
Received*(AES256+SHA, 0.04719,
Received*(AES256, 0.04719,
Received*with+(AES256, 0.04871,
Received*(HELO+mail, 0.06979,
Received*subscribe+inter7.com, 0.90392,
Received*by+mail, 0.10400,
Received*inter7.com+Sat, 0.89445,
Received*11+May, 0.88942,
Received*mail, 0.11107,
Received*SMTP+11, 0.16995

subscribe

!DSPAM:536f11da34264733211074!

WELCOME to vchkpw@inter7.com

[vchkpw-help]

Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
vchkpw@inter7.com mailing list.

I'm working for my owner, who can be reached
at vchkpw-ow...@inter7.com.

Acknowledgment: I have added the address

   arch...@mail-archive.com

to the vchkpw mailing list.

Welcome to vchkpw@inter7.com!

Please save this message so that you know the address you are
subscribed under, in case you later want to unsubscribe or change your
subscription address.

To unsubscribe, send a message to:

vchkpw-unsubscribe-archive=mail-archive@inter7.com


--- Administrative commands for the vchkpw list ---

I can handle administrative requests automatically. Please
do not send them to the list address! Instead, send
your message to the correct command address:

For help and a description of available commands, send a message to:
   vchkpw-h...@inter7.com

To subscribe to the list, send a message to:
   vchkpw-subscr...@inter7.com

To remove your address from the list, just send a message to
the address in the ``List-Unsubscribe'' header of any list
message. If you haven't changed addresses since subscribing,
you can also send a message to:
   vchkpw-unsubscr...@inter7.com

For addition or removal of addresses, I'll send a confirmation
message to that address. When you receive it, simply reply to it
to complete the transaction.

If you need to get in touch with the human owner of this list,
please send a message to:

vchkpw-ow...@inter7.com

Please include a FORWARDED list message with ALL HEADERS intact
to make it easier to help you.

--- Enclosed is a copy of the request I received.

Return-Path: arch...@mail-archive.com
Received: (qmail 3241 invoked by uid 0); 11 May 2014 06:35:30 -
Received: from unknown (HELO mail-archive.com) (72.52.77.8)
  by mail.inter7.com with (AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 11 May 2014 06:35:30 
-
Received: from archive by mail-archive.com with local (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from arch...@mail-archive.com)
id 1WjNMK-0002gt-Su
for 
vchkpw-sc.1399787994.imbnhifabmehgpcjalbc-archive=mail-archive@inter7.com; 
Sat, 10 May 2014 23:35:40 -0700
To: 
vchkpw-sc.1399787994.imbnhifabmehgpcjalbc-archive=mail-archive@inter7.com
X-Mailer: mail (GNU Mailutils 2.2)
Message-Id: e1wjnmk-0002gt...@mail-archive.com
From: The Mail Archive arch...@mail-archive.com
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 23:35:40 -0700
X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent
X-DSPAM-Processed: Sun May 11 01:35:30 2014
X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.6332
X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.
X-DSPAM-Signature: 536f1a3234261070012542
X-DSPAM-Factors: 27,
From*Mail, 0.00890,
Date*35+40, 0.99000,
Received*(AES256+SHA, 0.04831,
Received*(AES256, 0.04831,
Received*with+(AES256, 0.04984,
Received*(HELO+mail, 0.06990,
Received*inter7.com+Sat, 0.89603,
Received*by+mail, 0.10408,
Received*11+May, 0.89283,
Received*mail, 0.0,
Received*mail, 0.0,
Received*SMTP+11, 0.17065,
Date*May+2014, 0.20793,
Date*40+0700, 0.79194,
Received*May+2014, 0.21960,
Received*May+2014, 0.21960,
From*mail, 0.77871,
Received*May, 0.22480,
Received*May, 0.22480,
Date*May, 0.22701,
To*vchkpw, 0.24496,
Received*SHA+encrypted), 0.24618,
Received*SHA, 0.24863,
Date*10+May, 0.25101,
Received*encrypted)+SMTP, 0.25173,
Received*encrypted), 0.25522,
Received*(Exim+4.76), 0.26160


!DSPAM:536f1a3234261070012542!

RE: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Stéphane SALETTES]

Thank

I suppose the '-' cause problem but i can t change :(

Cordialement

--
Stephane Salettes


ABAC Informatique
1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat
ZI La Coupe
11100 Narbonne

Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

http://www.abac-info.com


-Message d'origine-
De : Eric Shubert [mailto:e...@shubes.net] 
Envoyé : jeudi 24 avril 2014 19:46
À : vchkpw@inter7.com
Objet : [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection 
problem

That could very well be, Tom.

Stéphane, I believe the odd behavior is due to qmail's 'extension' 
feature, which comes into play with accounts that contain a '-', and the 
portion before the dash matches another account or forward. You could avoid 
this 'collision' (or 'conflict' or 'commonality') by choosing different address 
names, such as 'ssiad_secretariat@' or 'ssiad.secretariat@' or 
'secretariat-ssiad@' (providing there is no account or forward called 
'secretariat@' in this last case).

Email extensions are a handy feature for some users, but admins need to be 
careful when using a '-' in account names.

--
-Eric 'shubes'

On 04/24/2014 09:43 AM, Tom Collins wrote:
 This sounds like a possible bug (or perhaps a configuration issue) in 
 vdelivermail.

 With MySQL aliases, vdelivermail handles delivery.  It's finding the ssiad 
 forward first and delivering the message there (since -secretariat is an 
 extension to that mailbox).

 By deleting the alias record stored in MySQL and replacing it with a 
 dot-qmail file (.qmail-ssiad), you're allowing Qmail to handle its delivery 
 before the message is handed off to vdelivermail.

 It's been a long time since I've worked with the vpopmail source code, but I 
 imagine you'll find logic in vdelivermail that has it checking for aliases 
 before mailboxes, and it's iterating through all possible base/extension 
 pairs (foo-bar-baz, then foo-bar, then foo).

 -Tom


 On Apr 24, 2014, at 12:50 AM, Stéphane SALETTES wrote:

 Hi,

 You don't understand my problem, maybe because my english is bad :(

 ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr is a standalone account no foward

 spa...@piemont.fr is a standalone account no foward

 and ss...@piemont.fr is just a foward to spa...@piemont.fr

 but if i send a message to ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr   nothing in is 
 mailbox but the message is in the box of spa...@piemont.fr

 the work arraound that i find is delete the foward on qmailadmin 
 (mysql) (ss...@piemont.fr -  spa...@piemont.fr) and create a file

 .qmail-ssiad
 spa...@piemont.fr


 Hope you understand me this time sorry :)

 Thank










 Cordialement

 --
 Stephane Salettes


 ABAC Informatique
 1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat
 ZI La Coupe
 11100 Narbonne

 Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
 FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
 GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

 http://www.abac-info.com


 -Message d'origine-
 De : xaf [mailto:x...@abaxe.net]
 Envoyé : samedi 19 avril 2014 03:42
 À : vchkpw@inter7.com
 Objet : Re: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: 
 [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

 |-- Eric Shubert, le 18/04/2014 23:38, a dit :
 3) what you desire to happen
 When i send a message to  ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr i want that 
 the message go to the ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr mail box and 
 foward to spa...@piemont.fr

 And when i send a massage to  ss...@piemont.fr i want a simple 
 foward to spa...@piemont.fr
 I think if you modify the ssiad-secretariat@ account to also forward 
 a copy to spasad@, that would achieve your desired behavior. I.e., 
 in qmailadmin, under the Routing section, select Forward To, and 
 check the Save a Copy checkbox.

 it's a part of a solution
 this will create a .qmail file in the user directory but vdelivermail 
 won't read it because of the extension addresses mechanism

 Stéphane
 ssiad-secretariat@ is an alias for user ssiad@ it's quite a strange 
 conf to give a forward to the user and the account to the alias

 mail delivery in a glance
 qmail-send - qmail-lspawn - qmail-local - vdelivermail - 
 vuser/valias

 we must shorten delivery before vdelivermail handle it because of 
ssiad forward, vdelivermail will ignore ssiad-secretariat account IMHO 
a 32 bit guest consumes less memory than a 64 bit one. Unless you
need to address more than 4GB of RAM you really don't get any benefit from a 
64bit VM.

Proxmox dev's seem to agree with me.
http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/FAQ

Also, the disks should be of type virtio and not IDE. Performance under IDE 
sucks big time.

 lspawn read users/cdb, we can shorten the delivery here, answer 2 
 local read .qmail-files in domain directory, we can shorten too here, 
 answer 1

 answer 1, according vpopmail is in /home/vpopmail create a file 
 .qmail-ssiad-secretariat in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr
 0600 vpopmail:vchkpw
 write in
 spa...@piemont.fr
 /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
 if you want to change the headers for 

RE: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Stéphane SALETTES]

Hi,

You don't understand my problem, maybe because my english is bad :(

ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr is a standalone account no foward 

spa...@piemont.fr is a standalone account no foward

and ss...@piemont.fr is just a foward to spa...@piemont.fr

but if i send a message to ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr   nothing in is mailbox 
but the message is in the box of spa...@piemont.fr

the work arraound that i find is delete the foward on qmailadmin (mysql) 
(ss...@piemont.fr -  spa...@piemont.fr) and create a file 

.qmail-ssiad
spa...@piemont.fr


Hope you understand me this time sorry :)

Thank










Cordialement

--
Stephane Salettes


ABAC Informatique
1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat
ZI La Coupe
11100 Narbonne

Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

http://www.abac-info.com


-Message d'origine-
De : xaf [mailto:x...@abaxe.net] 
Envoyé : samedi 19 avril 2014 03:42
À : vchkpw@inter7.com
Objet : Re: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] 
Rrdirection problem

|-- Eric Shubert, le 18/04/2014 23:38, a dit :
 3) what you desire to happen
  When i send a message to  ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr i want that 
  the message go to the ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr mail box and 
  foward to spa...@piemont.fr
 
  And when i send a massage to  ss...@piemont.fr i want a simple 
  foward to spa...@piemont.fr
 I think if you modify the ssiad-secretariat@ account to also forward a 
 copy to spasad@, that would achieve your desired behavior. I.e., in 
 qmailadmin, under the Routing section, select Forward To, and check 
 the Save a Copy checkbox.

it's a part of a solution
this will create a .qmail file in the user directory but vdelivermail won't 
read it because of the extension addresses mechanism

Stéphane
ssiad-secretariat@ is an alias for user ssiad@ it's quite a strange conf to 
give a forward to the user and the account to the alias

mail delivery in a glance
qmail-send - qmail-lspawn - qmail-local - vdelivermail - vuser/valias

we must shorten delivery before vdelivermail handle it because of ssiad 
forward, vdelivermail will ignore ssiad-secretariat account

lspawn read users/cdb, we can shorten the delivery here, answer 2 local read 
.qmail-files in domain directory, we can shorten too here, answer 1

answer 1, according vpopmail is in /home/vpopmail create a file 
.qmail-ssiad-secretariat in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr
0600 vpopmail:vchkpw
write in
spa...@piemont.fr
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
if you want to change the headers for spasad or 
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/spasad/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
for straight copy

answer 2
according to Eric explanation
we have a .qmail in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/
containing
spa...@piemont.fr
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
we need local to read this .qmail file
so lspawn have to point to the correct directory before local handle delivery

edit /var/qmail/users/assign
add the line (check if 89:89 are uid gid of vpopmail:vchkpw)
=piemont.fr-ssiad-secretariat:piemont.fr:89:89:/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat:::
before the piemont.fr virtual domain line and run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-newu to 
rebuild /var/qmail/users/cdb

answer 3
a forward account instead of a simple forward delete ssiad forward create ssiad 
account apply Eric solution without saving a copy ssiad will be master for 
ssiad-everything but secretariat

xaf








!DSPAM:5358c24734262119615012!

Re: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Tom Collins]

This sounds like a possible bug (or perhaps a configuration issue) in 
vdelivermail.

With MySQL aliases, vdelivermail handles delivery.  It's finding the ssiad 
forward first and delivering the message there (since -secretariat is an 
extension to that mailbox).

By deleting the alias record stored in MySQL and replacing it with a dot-qmail 
file (.qmail-ssiad), you're allowing Qmail to handle its delivery before the 
message is handed off to vdelivermail.

It's been a long time since I've worked with the vpopmail source code, but I 
imagine you'll find logic in vdelivermail that has it checking for aliases 
before mailboxes, and it's iterating through all possible base/extension pairs 
(foo-bar-baz, then foo-bar, then foo).

-Tom


On Apr 24, 2014, at 12:50 AM, Stéphane SALETTES wrote:

 Hi,
 
 You don't understand my problem, maybe because my english is bad :(
 
 ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr is a standalone account no foward 
 
 spa...@piemont.fr is a standalone account no foward
 
 and ss...@piemont.fr is just a foward to spa...@piemont.fr
 
 but if i send a message to ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr   nothing in is 
 mailbox but the message is in the box of spa...@piemont.fr
 
 the work arraound that i find is delete the foward on qmailadmin (mysql) 
 (ss...@piemont.fr -  spa...@piemont.fr) and create a file 
 
 .qmail-ssiad
 spa...@piemont.fr
 
 
 Hope you understand me this time sorry :)
 
 Thank
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cordialement
 
 --
 Stephane Salettes
 
 
 ABAC Informatique
 1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat
 ZI La Coupe
 11100 Narbonne
 
 Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
 FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
 GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28
 
 http://www.abac-info.com
 
 
 -Message d'origine-
 De : xaf [mailto:x...@abaxe.net] 
 Envoyé : samedi 19 avril 2014 03:42
 À : vchkpw@inter7.com
 Objet : Re: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] 
 Rrdirection problem
 
 |-- Eric Shubert, le 18/04/2014 23:38, a dit :
 3) what you desire to happen
 When i send a message to  ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr i want that 
 the message go to the ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr mail box and 
 foward to spa...@piemont.fr
 
 And when i send a massage to  ss...@piemont.fr i want a simple 
 foward to spa...@piemont.fr
 I think if you modify the ssiad-secretariat@ account to also forward a 
 copy to spasad@, that would achieve your desired behavior. I.e., in 
 qmailadmin, under the Routing section, select Forward To, and check 
 the Save a Copy checkbox.
 
 it's a part of a solution
 this will create a .qmail file in the user directory but vdelivermail won't 
 read it because of the extension addresses mechanism
 
 Stéphane
 ssiad-secretariat@ is an alias for user ssiad@ it's quite a strange conf to 
 give a forward to the user and the account to the alias
 
 mail delivery in a glance
 qmail-send - qmail-lspawn - qmail-local - vdelivermail - vuser/valias
 
 we must shorten delivery before vdelivermail handle it because of ssiad 
 forward, vdelivermail will ignore ssiad-secretariat account
 
 lspawn read users/cdb, we can shorten the delivery here, answer 2 local read 
 .qmail-files in domain directory, we can shorten too here, answer 1
 
 answer 1, according vpopmail is in /home/vpopmail create a file 
 .qmail-ssiad-secretariat in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr
 0600 vpopmail:vchkpw
 write in
 spa...@piemont.fr
 /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
 if you want to change the headers for spasad or 
 /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/spasad/Maildir/
 /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
 for straight copy
 
 answer 2
 according to Eric explanation
 we have a .qmail in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/
 containing
 spa...@piemont.fr
 /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
 we need local to read this .qmail file
 so lspawn have to point to the correct directory before local handle delivery
 
 edit /var/qmail/users/assign
 add the line (check if 89:89 are uid gid of vpopmail:vchkpw)
 =piemont.fr-ssiad-secretariat:piemont.fr:89:89:/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat:::
 before the piemont.fr virtual domain line and run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-newu 
 to rebuild /var/qmail/users/cdb
 
 answer 3
 a forward account instead of a simple forward delete ssiad forward create 
 ssiad account apply Eric solution without saving a copy ssiad will be master 
 for ssiad-everything but secretariat
 
 xaf
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


!DSPAM:53593f3d34268127549349!

[vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Eric Shubert]

That could very well be, Tom.

Stéphane, I believe the odd behavior is due to qmail's 'extension' 
feature, which comes into play with accounts that contain a '-', and the 
portion before the dash matches another account or forward. You could 
avoid this 'collision' (or 'conflict' or 'commonality') by choosing 
different address names, such as 'ssiad_secretariat@' or 
'ssiad.secretariat@' or 'secretariat-ssiad@' (providing there is no 
account or forward called 'secretariat@' in this last case).


Email extensions are a handy feature for some users, but admins need to 
be careful when using a '-' in account names.


--
-Eric 'shubes'

On 04/24/2014 09:43 AM, Tom Collins wrote:

This sounds like a possible bug (or perhaps a configuration issue) in 
vdelivermail.

With MySQL aliases, vdelivermail handles delivery.  It's finding the ssiad forward first 
and delivering the message there (since -secretariat is an extension to that 
mailbox).

By deleting the alias record stored in MySQL and replacing it with a dot-qmail 
file (.qmail-ssiad), you're allowing Qmail to handle its delivery before the 
message is handed off to vdelivermail.

It's been a long time since I've worked with the vpopmail source code, but I 
imagine you'll find logic in vdelivermail that has it checking for aliases 
before mailboxes, and it's iterating through all possible base/extension pairs 
(foo-bar-baz, then foo-bar, then foo).

-Tom


On Apr 24, 2014, at 12:50 AM, Stéphane SALETTES wrote:


Hi,

You don't understand my problem, maybe because my english is bad :(

ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr is a standalone account no foward

spa...@piemont.fr is a standalone account no foward

and ss...@piemont.fr is just a foward to spa...@piemont.fr

but if i send a message to ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr   nothing in is mailbox 
but the message is in the box of spa...@piemont.fr

the work arraound that i find is delete the foward on qmailadmin (mysql) 
(ss...@piemont.fr -  spa...@piemont.fr) and create a file

.qmail-ssiad
spa...@piemont.fr


Hope you understand me this time sorry :)

Thank










Cordialement

--
Stephane Salettes


ABAC Informatique
1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat
ZI La Coupe
11100 Narbonne

Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

http://www.abac-info.com


-Message d'origine-
De : xaf [mailto:x...@abaxe.net]
Envoyé : samedi 19 avril 2014 03:42
À : vchkpw@inter7.com
Objet : Re: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] 
Rrdirection problem

|-- Eric Shubert, le 18/04/2014 23:38, a dit :

3) what you desire to happen

When i send a message to  ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr i want that
the message go to the ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr mail box and
foward to spa...@piemont.fr

And when i send a massage to  ss...@piemont.fr i want a simple
foward to spa...@piemont.fr

I think if you modify the ssiad-secretariat@ account to also forward a
copy to spasad@, that would achieve your desired behavior. I.e., in
qmailadmin, under the Routing section, select Forward To, and check
the Save a Copy checkbox.


it's a part of a solution
this will create a .qmail file in the user directory but vdelivermail won't 
read it because of the extension addresses mechanism

Stéphane
ssiad-secretariat@ is an alias for user ssiad@ it's quite a strange conf to 
give a forward to the user and the account to the alias

mail delivery in a glance
qmail-send - qmail-lspawn - qmail-local - vdelivermail - vuser/valias

we must shorten delivery before vdelivermail handle it because of ssiad 
forward, vdelivermail will ignore ssiad-secretariat account
IMHO a 32 bit guest consumes less memory than a 64 bit one. Unless you

need to address more than 4GB of RAM you really don't get any benefit
from a 64bit VM.

Proxmox dev's seem to agree with me.
http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/FAQ

Also, the disks should be of type virtio and not IDE. Performance under
IDE sucks big time.


lspawn read users/cdb, we can shorten the delivery here, answer 2 local read 
.qmail-files in domain directory, we can shorten too here, answer 1

answer 1, according vpopmail is in /home/vpopmail create a file 
.qmail-ssiad-secretariat in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr
0600 vpopmail:vchkpw
write in
spa...@piemont.fr
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
if you want to change the headers for spasad or 
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/spasad/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
for straight copy

answer 2
according to Eric explanation
we have a .qmail in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/
containing
spa...@piemont.fr
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
we need local to read this .qmail file
so lspawn have to point to the correct directory before local handle delivery

edit /var/qmail/users/assign
add the line (check if 89:89 are uid gid of vpopmail:vchkpw)

Re: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Tonix - Antonio Nati]

Stéphane,

try in this way:

 * delete the forward ss...@piemont.fr
 * create one normal account ss...@piemont.fr
 * insert within this account a forward to spa...@piemont.fr

In this way it should work.

Tonino


Il 24/04/2014 19:45, Eric Shubert ha scritto:

That could very well be, Tom.

Stéphane, I believe the odd behavior is due to qmail's 'extension' 
feature, which comes into play with accounts that contain a '-', and 
the portion before the dash matches another account or forward. You 
could avoid this 'collision' (or 'conflict' or 'commonality') by 
choosing different address names, such as 'ssiad_secretariat@' or 
'ssiad.secretariat@' or 'secretariat-ssiad@' (providing there is no 
account or forward called 'secretariat@' in this last case).


Email extensions are a handy feature for some users, but admins need 
to be careful when using a '-' in account names.





--

Inter@zioniInterazioni di Antonio Nati
   http://www.interazioni.it  to...@interazioni.it




!DSPAM:5359502434261244028932!

[vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Eric Shubert]

On 04/18/2014 06:41 PM, xaf wrote:

|-- Eric Shubert, le 18/04/2014 23:38, a dit :

3) what you desire to happen

When i send a message to  ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr i want that the message 
go to the ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr mail box and foward to spa...@piemont.fr

And when i send a massage to  ss...@piemont.fr i want a simple foward to 
spa...@piemont.fr

I think if you modify the ssiad-secretariat@ account to also forward a
copy to spasad@, that would achieve your desired behavior. I.e., in
qmailadmin, under the Routing section, select Forward To, and check the
Save a Copy checkbox.


it's a part of a solution
this will create a .qmail file in the user directory
but vdelivermail won't read it
because of the extension addresses mechanism

Stéphane
ssiad-secretariat@ is an alias for user ssiad@
it's quite a strange conf to give a forward to the user
and the account to the alias

mail delivery in a glance
qmail-send - qmail-lspawn - qmail-local - vdelivermail - vuser/valias

we must shorten delivery before vdelivermail handle it
because of ssiad forward, vdelivermail will ignore ssiad-secretariat account

lspawn read users/cdb, we can shorten the delivery here, answer 2
local read .qmail-files in domain directory, we can shorten too here, answer 1

answer 1, according vpopmail is in /home/vpopmail
create a file .qmail-ssiad-secretariat in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr
0600 vpopmail:vchkpw
write in
spa...@piemont.fr
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
if you want to change the headers for spasad
or
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/spasad/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
for straight copy

answer 2
according to Eric explanation
we have a .qmail in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/
containing
spa...@piemont.fr
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
we need local to read this .qmail file
so lspawn have to point to the correct directory
before local handle delivery

edit /var/qmail/users/assign
add the line (check if 89:89 are uid gid of vpopmail:vchkpw)
=piemont.fr-ssiad-secretariat:piemont.fr:89:89:/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat:::
before the piemont.fr virtual domain line
and run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-newu to rebuild /var/qmail/users/cdb

answer 3
a forward account instead of a simple forward
delete ssiad forward
create ssiad account
apply Eric solution without saving a copy
ssiad will be master for ssiad-everything but secretariat

xaf










Thanks for this post, xaf. It's the best description I've seen of 
delivery in the 8 years I've been using QMT. I expect this will be 
helpful when we integrate Dovecot's LDA in the near future.


Stéphane,
FWIW, I'd go with answer #3. It seems to me to be the simplest given 
your situation. It can all be done with qmailadmin, with no need to use 
any CLI configuration methods.


--
-Eric 'shubes'


!DSPAM:5352a9f034261066319550!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Alessio Cecchi]

Il 17/04/2014 20:39, Jeremy Kister ha scritto:

On 4/17/2014 2:33 PM, Remo Mattei wrote:

Hello all
I have a qmail which is running now I want to up it to netqmail 1.06
so I plan to recomp it and I have vpopmail working so on the new one I
want to add chkuser and tls but also few others like the channel since
gmail and others have been really a pain does anyone suggest a set of
patches or one that does it all in one?


i still like and use my qmail-1.03.isp.patch

it's named isp because i was working for an isp at the them and had
nothing better to name it.  it's used in lots of places that have
nothing to do with an isp.


http://jeremy.kister.net/code/qmail-1.03.isp.patch



Hi,

I'm also running the qmail-1.03.isp.patch from Jeremy and I can confirm 
that works really fine for ISP.


I have made some small add to Jeremy's patch:

http://notes.sagredo.eu/sites/notes.sagredo.eu/files/qmail/patches/qmail-1.03-reread-concurrency.2.patch

and

http://notes.sagredo.eu/sites/notes.sagredo.eu/files/qmail/patches/qmail-queue-custom-error-v2.netqmail-1.05.patch

I'm also using http://jeremy.kister.net/code/ucspi-tcp-0.88.isp.patch.

Thanks Jeremy for your code!

--
Alessio Cecchi is:
@ ILS - http://www.linux.it/~alessice/
on LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/alessice
Assistenza Sistemi GNU/Linux - http://www.cecchi.biz
Cloud Email Hosting - http://www.qboxmail.com
@ PLUG - ex-Presidente, adesso senatore a vita, http://www.prato.linux.it

!DSPAM:5350c49234262695215939!

Re: [vchkpw] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Alessio Cecchi]

Il 17/04/2014 21:48, Remo Mattei ha scritto:

Hi Jeremy I tried your patch against 1.06 here is the output maybe you can help 
out.


The Jeremy's patch should be apply starting from qmail-1.03. Please, 
read TO INSTALL note.


Ciao

--
Alessio Cecchi is:
@ ILS - http://www.linux.it/~alessice/
on LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/alessice
Assistenza Sistemi GNU/Linux - http://www.cecchi.biz
Cloud Email Hosting - http://www.qboxmail.com
@ PLUG - ex-Presidente, adesso senatore a vita, http://www.prato.linux.it

!DSPAM:5350c55034261932847466!

[vchkpw] RE: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Stéphane SALETTES]

1) There are 2 emails accounts, spa...@piemont.fr , ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr
ss...@piemont.fr simply a forward with no account to spa...@piemont.fr

2) what actually happens
When a message is sent to ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr , 
ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr doesn't receive this message but spa...@piemont.fr 
yes

3) what you desire to happen
When i send a message to  ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr i want that the message 
go to the ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr mail box and foward to spa...@piemont.fr 

And when i send a massage to  ss...@piemont.fr i want a simple foward to 
spa...@piemont.fr

thank



siad-secretar...@piemont.fr mailto:siad-secretar...@piemont.fr

 spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr

 ss...@piemont.fr mailto:ss...@piemont.fr

Cordialement

--
Stephane Salettes


ABAC Informatique
1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat
ZI La Coupe
11100 Narbonne

Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

http://www.abac-info.com


-Message d'origine-
De : Eric Shubert [mailto:e...@shubes.net] 
Envoyé : jeudi 17 avril 2014 17:50
À : vchkpw@inter7.com
Objet : !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

Stéphane,

This does not appear to me to be what was written on the QMT list.

In order to be clear, please describe:
1) your configuration (what are accounts, what are forwards)
2) what actually happens
3) what you desire to happen

For example:
1) There are 2 email accounts, ss...@piemont.fr and spa...@piemont.fr. 
The ss...@piemont.fr account is configured to forward messages to 
spa...@piemont.fr. (Or is ss...@piemont.fr simply a forward with no
account?)

2) When an email is sent to ??, it arrives at ??.

3) When an email is sent to ??, I'd like it to arrive at ??.

Thanks.

P.S. You've repeatedly written siad-secretariat@, which I assumed was a typo 
and you meant ssiad-secretariat@. Is this the case or not?

--
-Eric 'shubes'

On 04/17/2014 07:16 AM, Stéphane SALETTES wrote:
 This is 3 emails box

 siad-secretar...@piemont.fr mailto:siad-secretar...@piemont.fr

 spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr

 ss...@piemont.fr mailto:ss...@piemont.fr

 and a redirection ss...@piemont.fr mailto:ss...@piemont.frto
 spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr

 When I send an email to siad-secretar...@piemont.fr 
 mailto:siad-secretar...@piemont.fr  he did not

 receive but  is spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr who 
 receives

 Thank

 Cordialement

 --

 Stephane Salettes


 ABAC Informatique
 1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat

 ZI La Coupe
 11100 Narbonne

 Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
 FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
 GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

 http://www.abac-info.com blocked::http://www.abac-info.com/

 logo

 







!DSPAM:5351484734261160721075!

[vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Eric Shubert]

In that case,
On 04/18/2014 08:44 AM, Stéphane SALETTES wrote:

1) There are 2 emails accounts, spa...@piemont.fr , ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr
ss...@piemont.fr simply a forward with no account to spa...@piemont.fr


I see.


2) what actually happens
When a message is sent to ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr , 
ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr doesn't receive this message but spa...@piemont.fr 
yes


That's what I would expect to happen, given your configuration.


3) what you desire to happen
When i send a message to  ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr i want that the message 
go to the ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr mail box and foward to spa...@piemont.fr

And when i send a massage to  ss...@piemont.fr i want a simple foward to 
spa...@piemont.fr


I think if you modify the ssiad-secretariat@ account to also forward a 
copy to spasad@, that would achieve your desired behavior. I.e., in 
qmailadmin, under the Routing section, select Forward To, and check the 
Save a Copy checkbox.


If that doesn't do what you desire, please explain how you expect your 
configuration to behave.


--
-Eric 'shubes'


thank



siad-secretar...@piemont.fr mailto:siad-secretar...@piemont.fr


spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr

ss...@piemont.fr mailto:ss...@piemont.fr


Cordialement

--
Stephane Salettes


ABAC Informatique
1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat
ZI La Coupe
11100 Narbonne

Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

http://www.abac-info.com


-Message d'origine-
De : Eric Shubert [mailto:e...@shubes.net]
Envoyé : jeudi 17 avril 2014 17:50
À : vchkpw@inter7.com
Objet : !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

Stéphane,

This does not appear to me to be what was written on the QMT list.

In order to be clear, please describe:
1) your configuration (what are accounts, what are forwards)
2) what actually happens
3) what you desire to happen

For example:
1) There are 2 email accounts, ss...@piemont.fr and spa...@piemont.fr.
The ss...@piemont.fr account is configured to forward messages to 
spa...@piemont.fr. (Or is ss...@piemont.fr simply a forward with no
account?)

2) When an email is sent to ??, it arrives at ??.

3) When an email is sent to ??, I'd like it to arrive at ??.

Thanks.

P.S. You've repeatedly written siad-secretariat@, which I assumed was a typo 
and you meant ssiad-secretariat@. Is this the case or not?

--
-Eric 'shubes'

On 04/17/2014 07:16 AM, Stéphane SALETTES wrote:

This is 3 emails box

siad-secretar...@piemont.fr mailto:siad-secretar...@piemont.fr

spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr

ss...@piemont.fr mailto:ss...@piemont.fr

and a redirection ss...@piemont.fr mailto:ss...@piemont.frto
spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr

When I send an email to siad-secretar...@piemont.fr
mailto:siad-secretar...@piemont.fr  he did not

receive but  is spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr who
receives

Thank

Cordialement

--

Stephane Salettes


ABAC Informatique
1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat

ZI La Coupe
11100 Narbonne

Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

http://www.abac-info.com blocked::http://www.abac-info.com/

logo


















!DSPAM:53519b6834261578218977!

Re: [vchkpw] Re: !!! CHECK SENDER !!![vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[xaf]

|-- Eric Shubert, le 18/04/2014 23:38, a dit :
 3) what you desire to happen
  When i send a message to  ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr i want that the 
  message go to the ssiad-secretar...@piemont.fr mail box and foward to 
  spa...@piemont.fr
 
  And when i send a massage to  ss...@piemont.fr i want a simple foward to 
  spa...@piemont.fr
 I think if you modify the ssiad-secretariat@ account to also forward a 
 copy to spasad@, that would achieve your desired behavior. I.e., in 
 qmailadmin, under the Routing section, select Forward To, and check the 
 Save a Copy checkbox.

it's a part of a solution
this will create a .qmail file in the user directory
but vdelivermail won't read it
because of the extension addresses mechanism

Stéphane
ssiad-secretariat@ is an alias for user ssiad@
it's quite a strange conf to give a forward to the user
and the account to the alias

mail delivery in a glance
qmail-send - qmail-lspawn - qmail-local - vdelivermail - vuser/valias

we must shorten delivery before vdelivermail handle it
because of ssiad forward, vdelivermail will ignore ssiad-secretariat account

lspawn read users/cdb, we can shorten the delivery here, answer 2
local read .qmail-files in domain directory, we can shorten too here, answer 1

answer 1, according vpopmail is in /home/vpopmail
create a file .qmail-ssiad-secretariat in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr
0600 vpopmail:vchkpw
write in
spa...@piemont.fr
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
if you want to change the headers for spasad
or
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/spasad/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
for straight copy

answer 2
according to Eric explanation
we have a .qmail in /home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/
containing
spa...@piemont.fr
/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat/Maildir/
we need local to read this .qmail file
so lspawn have to point to the correct directory
before local handle delivery

edit /var/qmail/users/assign
add the line (check if 89:89 are uid gid of vpopmail:vchkpw)
=piemont.fr-ssiad-secretariat:piemont.fr:89:89:/home/vpopmail/domains/piemont.fr/ssiad-secretariat:::
before the piemont.fr virtual domain line
and run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-newu to rebuild /var/qmail/users/cdb

answer 3
a forward account instead of a simple forward
delete ssiad forward
create ssiad account
apply Eric solution without saving a copy
ssiad will be master for ssiad-everything but secretariat

xaf





!DSPAM:5351d45834261943715214!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Rrdirection problem

[Eric Shubert]

Stéphane,

This does not appear to me to be what was written on the QMT list.

In order to be clear, please describe:
1) your configuration (what are accounts, what are forwards)
2) what actually happens
3) what you desire to happen

For example:
1) There are 2 email accounts, ss...@piemont.fr and spa...@piemont.fr. 
The ss...@piemont.fr account is configured to forward messages to 
spa...@piemont.fr. (Or is ss...@piemont.fr simply a forward with no 
account?)


2) When an email is sent to ??, it arrives at ??.

3) When an email is sent to ??, I'd like it to arrive at ??.

Thanks.

P.S. You've repeatedly written siad-secretariat@, which I assumed was a 
typo and you meant ssiad-secretariat@. Is this the case or not?


--
-Eric 'shubes'

On 04/17/2014 07:16 AM, Stéphane SALETTES wrote:

This is 3 emails box

siad-secretar...@piemont.fr mailto:siad-secretar...@piemont.fr

spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr

ss...@piemont.fr mailto:ss...@piemont.fr

and a redirection ss...@piemont.fr mailto:ss...@piemont.frto
spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr

When I send an email to siad-secretar...@piemont.fr
mailto:siad-secretar...@piemont.fr  he did not

receive but  is spa...@piemont.fr mailto:spa...@piemont.fr who receives

Thank

Cordialement

--

Stephane Salettes


ABAC Informatique
1 Bis Ave Pech Loubat

ZI La Coupe
11100 Narbonne

Tél: 33 (0)4 68 41 73 00
FAX : 33 (0)4 6841 73 02
GSM: 33 (0)6 85 36 67 28

http://www.abac-info.com blocked::http://www.abac-info.com/

logo







!DSPAM:534ff83234265858656019!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Remo Mattei]

Hello all
I have a qmail which is running now I want to up it to netqmail 1.06 so I plan 
to recomp it and I have vpopmail working so on the new one I want to add 
chkuser and tls but also few others like the channel since gmail and others 
have been really a pain does anyone suggest a set of patches or one that does 
it all in one? 

Thanks


Inviato da iPhone ()
!DSPAM:53501ec534266584610313!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Jeremy Kister]

On 4/17/2014 2:33 PM, Remo Mattei wrote:

Hello all
I have a qmail which is running now I want to up it to netqmail 1.06 so I plan 
to recomp it and I have vpopmail working so on the new one I want to add 
chkuser and tls but also few others like the channel since gmail and others 
have been really a pain does anyone suggest a set of patches or one that does 
it all in one?


i still like and use my qmail-1.03.isp.patch

it's named isp because i was working for an isp at the them and had 
nothing better to name it.  it's used in lots of places that have 
nothing to do with an isp.



http://jeremy.kister.net/code/qmail-1.03.isp.patch

--

Jeremy Kister
http://jeremy.kister.net./


!DSPAM:53501fe034262670412911!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Remo Mattei]

Do u know what does this patch include will it work on netqmail 1.06?

Thanks

Inviato da iPhone ()

 Il giorno Apr 17, 2014, alle ore 11:39, Jeremy Kister 
 vpopmail...@jeremykister.com ha scritto:
 
 On 4/17/2014 2:33 PM, Remo Mattei wrote:
 Hello all
 I have a qmail which is running now I want to up it to netqmail 1.06 so I 
 plan to recomp it and I have vpopmail working so on the new one I want to 
 add chkuser and tls but also few others like the channel since gmail and 
 others have been really a pain does anyone suggest a set of patches or one 
 that does it all in one?
 
 i still like and use my qmail-1.03.isp.patch
 
 it's named isp because i was working for an isp at the them and had nothing 
 better to name it.  it's used in lots of places that have nothing to do with 
 an isp.
 
 
 http://jeremy.kister.net/code/qmail-1.03.isp.patch
 
 -- 
 
 Jeremy Kister
 http://jeremy.kister.net./
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

!DSPAM:5350229534261724115646!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Remo Mattei]

Nice does it have tls?

Inviato da iPhone ()

 Il giorno Apr 17, 2014, alle ore 11:39, Jeremy Kister 
 vpopmail...@jeremykister.com ha scritto:
 
 On 4/17/2014 2:33 PM, Remo Mattei wrote:
 Hello all
 I have a qmail which is running now I want to up it to netqmail 1.06 so I 
 plan to recomp it and I have vpopmail working so on the new one I want to 
 add chkuser and tls but also few others like the channel since gmail and 
 others have been really a pain does anyone suggest a set of patches or one 
 that does it all in one?
 
 i still like and use my qmail-1.03.isp.patch
 
 it's named isp because i was working for an isp at the them and had nothing 
 better to name it.  it's used in lots of places that have nothing to do with 
 an isp.
 
 
 http://jeremy.kister.net/code/qmail-1.03.isp.patch
 
 -- 
 
 Jeremy Kister
 http://jeremy.kister.net./
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

!DSPAM:535022f934261946090414!

Re: [vchkpw] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Jeremy Kister]

On 4/17/2014 2:52 PM, Remo Mattei wrote:

Nice does it have tls?


no TLS; i use all SSL.  o well. :)

--

Jeremy Kister
http://jeremy.kister.net./




!DSPAM:5350261b34264808310748!

Re: [vchkpw] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Remo Mattei]

Hi Jeremy I tried your patch against 1.06 here is the output maybe you can help 
out.

Thanks
rw-r--r-- 1 root root   167 Apr 17 13:41 cdbmake_add.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   236 Apr 17 13:41 cdb_seek.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   459 Apr 17 13:42 dns.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   312 Apr 17 13:42 error.3.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   269 Apr 17 13:42 error.h.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   511 Apr 17 13:43 ipme.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  2958 Apr 17 13:41 Makefile.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   912 Apr 17 13:45 qmail.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   414 Apr 17 13:43 qmail-local.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  3800 Apr 17 13:43 qmail-pop3d.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  1118 Apr 17 13:43 qmail-popup.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 16882 Apr 17 13:45 qmail-smtpd.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  1074 Apr 17 13:45 sendmail.c.rej
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   323 Apr 17 13:45 spawn.c.rej


 On 4/17/2014 2:52 PM, Remo Mattei wrote:
 Nice does it have tls?
 
 no TLS; i use all SSL.  o well. :)
 
 -- 
 
 Jeremy Kister
 http://jeremy.kister.net./
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



!DSPAM:53502ffe34268150421313!

[vchkpw] Re: [SPAM] Patches for qmail suggestions and upgrade

[Eric Shubert]

On 04/17/2014 11:33 AM, Remo Mattei wrote:

Hello all
I have a qmail which is running now I want to up it to netqmail 1.06 so I plan 
to recomp it and I have vpopmail working so on the new one I want to add 
chkuser and tls but also few others like the channel since gmail and others 
have been really a pain does anyone suggest a set of patches or one that does 
it all in one?

Thanks


Inviato da iPhone ()





https://github.com/QMailToaster/qmail

Why roll your own?

QMT has prebuilt qmail package (as well as many others) for COS5 and 
COS6 now. http://mirrors.qmailtoaster.com/testing/.


--
-Eric 'shubes'


!DSPAM:535049e334261423416284!

Re: [vchkpw] vpopmail and qmail/assign subaddress separator configuration

[Tom Ierna]

On Apr 14, 2014, at 5:33 PM, Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com wrote:
 On 04/14/2014 03:32 PM, Tom Ierna wrote:
 In any case, I'm again looking into how to make a domain on one of my 
 vpopmail/qmail servers use
 the + separator for subaddresses, rather than -, and I'm coming up dry. 
 I realize that
 changing the subaddress separator will have an effect on ezmlm-idx, which I 
 use on this server,
 so that's why I only want to change the subaddress separator on a single 
 domain.
 
 You could build a secondary vpopmail installation in another location on the 
 server, using the
 alternate separator.  If your current one is in /home/vpopmail, build a 
 /home/vpopmail2 with the
 alternate configuration.

Thanks, Matt.

This may be a solution.

Can you point me in the right direction for where to change the subaddress 
separator for vpopmail, since changing /var/qmail/users/assign has no effect?

Best,
-Tom
!DSPAM:534df65034261006356087!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] vpopmail and qmail/assign subaddress separator configuration

[Tom Ierna]

Hello,

I have a couple of vpopmail/qmail-based e-mail servers that have worked well 
for many years.

A few years ago, we began using the Calendar Server on MacOSX. The calendar 
server sits on an internet pipe which doesn't pass port 25, so I can't use the 
built-in mail server to handle calendar invites and replies. Luckily, the 
Calendar Server configuration allows you to set up an e-mail address which it 
will use to send invites via SMTP and receive replies to the invites via IMAP.

Initially, I tried to set up an address on one of my vpopmail/qmail servers, as 
they service the domains which these calendar servers sit on. However, the 
Calendar Server uses + subaddressing, and vpopmail/qmail use - 
subaddressing.

The qmail docs say that you can configure the subaddress separator character by 
changing the - to a + following the user name in /var/qmail/users/assign. 
In vpopmail, users aren't in the assign file - it seems to contain a listing of 
domains that vpopmail services. Unsurprisingly, changing the - to a + and 
running qmail-newu as the qmail docs suggest doesn't change the subaddressing 
behavior for that domain.

The workaround since I did this research last has been to use a Gmail account 
specifically for each Calendar Server I maintained. This worked for a while, 
but then at some point recently, Gmail and Google Calendar started causing 
invites to be handled improperly. I'm not sure what conditions are necessary, 
but it seems like it has something to do with the recipient using Google 
Calendar instead of another calendar service with their Gmail address (and why 
wouldn't they?)

In any case, I'm again looking into how to make a domain on one of my 
vpopmail/qmail servers use the + separator for subaddresses, rather than -, 
and I'm coming up dry. I realize that changing the subaddress separator will 
have an effect on ezmlm-idx, which I use on this server, so that's why I only 
want to change the subaddress separator on a single domain.

Any pointers?

Thanks,
-Tom
!DSPAM:534c460734269808015307!

Re: [vchkpw] vpopmail and qmail/assign subaddress separator configuration

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 04/14/2014 03:32 PM, Tom Ierna wrote:
 In any case, I'm again looking into how to make a domain on one of my 
 vpopmail/qmail servers use
 the + separator for subaddresses, rather than -, and I'm coming up dry. I 
 realize that
 changing the subaddress separator will have an effect on ezmlm-idx, which I 
 use on this server,
 so that's why I only want to change the subaddress separator on a single 
 domain.

You could build a secondary vpopmail installation in another location on the 
server, using the
alternate separator.  If your current one is in /home/vpopmail, build a 
/home/vpopmail2 with the
alternate configuration.
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com   GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTTFQ/AAoJEOjQVexigXNz2YgIAIiFS/eU8X1/sz1bTrPpEI9j
OP+VTI+zvN2xSFi7sJw71MGIFgYPkIcBvlvI6YrWbCPpHrWHvcKhOCoeWypFGFme
sQe5QjYzJtJfblxIhhIgz2Qjt85d2EeYVla4H/kA1/KA5MEaYQCRJQKfcYo/W/CC
VdSJFuEIm63nIBhaeD9tVn5Sz2mYXwrRxBzFNAlCHjUWiK5/8/m/Uk0DwUAHvX5H
HCdBVHVJHqTxCifnJWiAzJvsqTLhr5CXCICgB4VIBCfJuWG9wXiMf4Dd1O9remFk
1Ti7LJ7tn9b0FHNgU3obDZG+l8FmkMPtxb0FDPKvV2Sdd3st0G7fyd5zT1lQIjM=
=pLMg
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[clay]

 

It doesn't matter how good your password is if you're using plaintext
connections :) 

Since every MUA I've used i nthe last few years supports SSL or TLS I
should really get around to deprecating pop3 and imap and only using
pop3s and imaps. 

This is especially imporant since some govts are trying to push through
laws forcing ISP's to store all of the data each of their users
downloads meaning that your unencrypted data will remain stored for
however long is legislated with access by who knows how many people. 

\Clay 

On 2014-03-05 07:57, Tom Collins wrote: 

 The submission entries outside the US could very well be from hacked 
 accounts. 
 
 I'm finding a surprising number of compromised accounts (once a week?), 
 including users with good passwords, so I have to assume they're snooped on 
 public wireless, or their computers are compromised by malware of some sort. 
 
 The vckpw-smtp entries from outside the US are probably also hacked accounts, 
 since mail received from remote servers doesn't include authentication. Sorry 
 I wasn't thinking clearly in my previous response -- I forgot these were 
 vchkpw entries and are only related to authentication. I was thinking about 
 qmail logs. 
 
 -Tom 
 
 On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:43 PM, LHTek wrote: 
 
 Thanks for the reply.
 
 NOTE: None of my users will have sent anything from outside the US.
 
 I've got some log entries for vchkpw-submission (marked as successful in the 
 log) with non-US IP's (Russia, Egypt, Honk Kong, etc). In my analysis I'm 
 marking those entries as hacked accounts. 
 
 From what I read from your response, vchkpw-smtp (marked as successful in the 
 log) entries could be mail sent TO my server FROM another server on port 25. 
 That tells me those are probably safe submissions - even if they are from 
 overseas IPs. Am I thinking correctly? 
 
 -
 FROM: Tom Collins t...@tomlogic.com
 TO: vchkpw@inter7.com 
 SENT: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:02 AM
 SUBJECT: Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp
 
 vchkpw-submission is on port 587, and is typically used for emai clients 
 relaying mail. It's often set up to require authentication. 
 
 vchkpw-smtp is on port 25, and can be used for email clients to relay mail, 
 or by other servers delivering mail to your server. 
 
 -Tom 
 
 On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:41 PM, LHTek wrote: 
 
 In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between these 2 entries 
 (vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)? 
 
 example: 
 Mar 4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission: (PLAIN) login 
 success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238 
 Mar 4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp: (PLAIN) login success 
 t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114
  

 

!DSPAM:53171ca934269165765629!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[LHTek]

I am using PLAIN text passwords I'm afraid. I will be changing that now though. 
I very tired of these password hacks.

Since this will be a new process for me I have questions: In changing the 
server to require encrypted passwords, will I need to contact all my clients 
and have them change the way they connect? Or will their email clients just 
automate the change?








 From: c...@milos.co.za c...@milos.co.za
To: vchkpw@inter7.com 
Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 6:45 AM
Subject: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] 
Qmail maillog  vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp
 


It doesn't matter how good your password is if you're using plaintext 
connections :)
Since every MUA I've used i nthe last few years supports SSL or TLS I should 
really get around to deprecating pop3 and imap and only using pop3s and imaps.
This is especially imporant since some govts are trying to push through laws 
forcing ISP's to store all of the data each of their users downloads meaning 
that your unencrypted data will remain stored for however long is legislated 
with access by who knows how many people.
 
\\Clay
 
On 2014-03-05 07:57, Tom Collins wrote:
The submission entries outside the US could very well be from hacked accounts. 
 
I'm finding a surprising number of compromised accounts (once a week?), 
including users with good passwords, so I have to assume they're snooped on 
public wireless, or their computers are compromised by malware of some sort.
 
The vckpw-smtp entries from outside the US are probably also hacked accounts, 
since mail received from remote servers doesn't include authentication.  
Sorry I wasn't thinking clearly in my previous response -- I forgot these 
were vchkpw entries and are only related to authentication.  I was thinking 
about qmail logs.


-Tom

On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:43 PM, LHTek wrote:

Thanks for the reply.

NOTE: None of my users will have sent anything from outside the US.

I've got some log entries for vchkpw-submission (marked as successful in the 
log) with non-US IP's (Russia, Egypt, Honk Kong, etc).In my analysis I'm 
marking those entries as hacked accounts. 


From what I read from your response, vchkpw-smtp (marked as successful in 
the log) entries could be mail sent TO my server FROM another server on port 
25. That tells me those are probably safe submissions - even if they are 
from overseas IPs. Am I thinking correctly?
 
 
 




From: Tom Collins t...@tomlogic.com
To: vchkpw@inter7.com 
Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp



vchkpw-submission is on port 587, and is typically used for emai clients 
relaying mail.  It's often set up to require authentication. 
 
vchkpw-smtp is on port 25, and can be used for email clients to relay mail, 
or by other servers delivering mail to your server.


 
-Tom

On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:41 PM, LHTek wrote:

In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between these 2 entries 
(vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)?
 
example:
Mar  4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission: (PLAIN) login 
success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238
Mar  4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp: (PLAIN) login 
success t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114
 
 


 
 
 



!DSPAM:531743f234265098613353!

[vchkpw] Re: [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[Eric Shubert]

PLAIN authentication is ok, provided that TLS has been activated by the 
client (presumably before credentials are sent) or SSL is in use 
(unconventional 465 port).


In changing this, each client will need to be manually reconfigured. I'm 
not aware of any client that automatically adjusts to changes such as this.


I'm not aware of a practical way to require encrypted passwords for 
qmail-smtpd (whether on port 25 or 587) at this point. Spamdyke has a 
recent feature allowing it to handle authentication, and I believe that 
Sam will be adding a setting to require encryption before authentication 
in the next release. When that's available, I'll be changing QMT to use 
spamdyke for authentication, which will (at last) allow for enforcement 
of this policy (no passwords sent in clear text).


On the retrieval side of things, dovecot provides such a configuration 
parameter, #disable_plaintext_auth = yes, which is the default value.


P.S. FWIW, I would have not expected to see (as many) unauthorized 
attempts on port 587. Spammers will eventually use this port though.


--
-Eric 'shubes'

On 03/05/2014 08:34 AM, LHTek wrote:

I am using PLAIN text passwords I'm afraid. I will be changing that now
though. I very tired of these password hacks.

Since this will be a new process for me I have questions: In changing
the server to require encrypted passwords, will I need to contact all my
clients and have them change the way they connect? Or will their email
clients just automate the change?





*From:* c...@milos.co.za c...@milos.co.za
*To:* vchkpw@inter7.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 5, 2014 6:45 AM
*Subject:* [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM]
Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

It doesn't matter how good your password is if you're using
plaintext connections :)
Since every MUA I've used i nthe last few years supports SSL or TLS
I should really get around to deprecating pop3 and imap and only
using pop3s and imaps.
This is especially imporant since some govts are trying to push
through laws forcing ISP's to store all of the data each of their
users downloads meaning that your unencrypted data will remain
stored for however long is legislated with access by who knows how
many people.
\\Clay
On 2014-03-05 07:57, Tom Collins wrote:

The submission entries outside the US could very well be from
hacked accounts.
I'm finding a surprising number of compromised accounts (once a
week?), including users with good passwords, so I have to assume
they're snooped on public wireless, or their computers are
compromised by malware of some sort.
The vckpw-smtp entries from outside the US are probably also
hacked accounts, since mail received from remote servers doesn't
include authentication.  Sorry I wasn't thinking clearly in my
previous response -- I forgot these were vchkpw entries and are
only related to authentication.  I was thinking about qmail logs.

-Tom

On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:43 PM, LHTek wrote:


Thanks for the reply.

NOTE: None of my users will have sent anything from outside the US.

I've got some log entries for vchkpw-submission (marked as
successful in the log) with non-US IP's (Russia, Egypt, Honk
Kong, etc).In my analysis I'm marking those entries as hacked
accounts.

From what I read from your response, vchkpw-smtp (marked as
successful in the log) entries could be mail sent TO my server
FROM another server on port 25. That tells me those are probably
safe submissions - even if they are from overseas IPs. Am I
thinking correctly?


*From:* Tom Collins t...@tomlogic.com mailto:t...@tomlogic.com
*To:* vchkpw@inter7.com mailto:vchkpw@inter7.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:02 AM
*Subject:* Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs
vchkpw-smtp

vchkpw-submission is on port 587, and is typically used for
emai clients relaying mail.  It's often set up to require
authentication.
vchkpw-smtp is on port 25, and can be used for email clients
to relay mail, or by other servers delivering mail to your
server.

-Tom

On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:41 PM, LHTek wrote:


In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between
these 2 entries (vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)?
example:
Mar  4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission:
(PLAIN) login success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238
Mar  4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp:
(PLAIN) login success t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114












!DSPAM:531756ed34261630194476!

[vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[LHTek]

In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between these 2 entries 
(vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)?

example:
Mar  4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission: (PLAIN) login 
success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238

Mar  4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp: (PLAIN) login success 
t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114

!DSPAM:5316b90234262261610445!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[FBBE -- INTERNET]

Cher Client,

Nous avons bien reçu votre e-mail et nous vous en remercions. Nos 
collaborateurs le traiteront aussi rapidement que possible.

Attention : ceci est une réponse automatique. Vous ne pouvez donc pas y 
répondre.

Veuillez agréer nos salutations distinguées. 

BNP Paribas Fortis SA
T : +32(0)2 762 20 00
Montagne du Parc 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Bruxelles | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Geachte klant,

Wij hebben uw e-mail goed ontvangen, waarvoor dank. Onze medewerkers zullen uw 
vraag zo snel mogelijk beantwoorden.

Opgelet : dit is een automatisch bericht. Hierop kan u geen antwoord versturen.

Met vriendelijke groeten,

BNP Paribas Fortis NV
T : +32(0)2 762 60 00
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Dear customer,

We hereby acknowledge receipt of your e-mail. Thank you. Our staff will answer 
your query as soon as possible.

Careful: This is an automatic message. Please do not reply.

Yours sincerely,

BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV
T : +32(0)2 261 11 11
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussels | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Sehr geehrte Kundin, sehr geehrter Kunde,

Wir danken Ihnen für Ihre E-Mail. Unsere Mitarbeiter werden Ihnen so schnell 
wie möglich antworten.

Achtung: dies ist eine automatische Nachricht. Sie können sie folglich nicht 
beantworten.

Freundliche Grüße

BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV
T : +32(0)2 261 11 11
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be

- Original Message -
From: LHTek dennywjo...@yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 4, 2014 9:41:18 PM GMT-08:00
Subject: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between these 2 entries 
(vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)?

example:
Mar  4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission: (PLAIN) login 
success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238

Mar  4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp: (PLAIN) login success 
t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114


==
BNP Paribas Fortis disclaimer:
http://www.bnpparibasfortis.com/e-mail-disclaimer.html
 
BNP Paribas Fortis privacy policy:
http://www.bnpparibasfortis.com/privacy-policy.html
 
==


!DSPAM:5316ba7434262017919841!

Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[Tom Collins]

vchkpw-submission is on port 587, and is typically used for emai clients 
relaying mail.  It's often set up to require authentication.

vchkpw-smtp is on port 25, and can be used for email clients to relay mail, or 
by other servers delivering mail to your server.

-Tom


On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:41 PM, LHTek wrote:

 In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between these 2 entries 
 (vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)?
 
 example:
 Mar  4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission: (PLAIN) login 
 success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238
 Mar  4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp: (PLAIN) login success 
 t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114
 
 
 



!DSPAM:5316bde734268482773211!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[FBBE -- INTERNET]

Cher Client,

Nous avons bien reçu votre e-mail et nous vous en remercions. Nos 
collaborateurs le traiteront aussi rapidement que possible.

Attention : ceci est une réponse automatique. Vous ne pouvez donc pas y 
répondre.

Veuillez agréer nos salutations distinguées. 

BNP Paribas Fortis SA
T : +32(0)2 762 20 00
Montagne du Parc 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Bruxelles | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Geachte klant,

Wij hebben uw e-mail goed ontvangen, waarvoor dank. Onze medewerkers zullen uw 
vraag zo snel mogelijk beantwoorden.

Opgelet : dit is een automatisch bericht. Hierop kan u geen antwoord versturen.

Met vriendelijke groeten,

BNP Paribas Fortis NV
T : +32(0)2 762 60 00
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Dear customer,

We hereby acknowledge receipt of your e-mail. Thank you. Our staff will answer 
your query as soon as possible.

Careful: This is an automatic message. Please do not reply.

Yours sincerely,

BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV
T : +32(0)2 261 11 11
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussels | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Sehr geehrte Kundin, sehr geehrter Kunde,

Wir danken Ihnen für Ihre E-Mail. Unsere Mitarbeiter werden Ihnen so schnell 
wie möglich antworten.

Achtung: dies ist eine automatische Nachricht. Sie können sie folglich nicht 
beantworten.

Freundliche Grüße

BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV
T : +32(0)2 261 11 11
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be

- Original Message -
From: Tom Collins t...@tomlogic.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 4, 2014 10:02:12 PM GMT-08:00
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

vchkpw-submission is on port 587, and is typically used for emai clients 
relaying mail.  It's often set up to require authentication.

vchkpw-smtp is on port 25, and can be used for email clients to relay mail, or 
by other servers delivering mail to your server.

-Tom


On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:41 PM, LHTek wrote:

 In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between these 2 entries 
 (vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)?
 
 example:
 Mar  4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission: (PLAIN) login 
 success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238
 Mar  4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp: (PLAIN) login success 
 t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114
 
 
 




==
BNP Paribas Fortis disclaimer:
http://www.bnpparibasfortis.com/e-mail-disclaimer.html
 
BNP Paribas Fortis privacy policy:
http://www.bnpparibasfortis.com/privacy-policy.html
 
==


!DSPAM:5316be7c34261148094982!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[LHTek]

Thanks for the reply.

NOTE: None of my users will have sent anything from outside the US.

I've got some log entries for vchkpw-submission (marked as successful in the 
log) with non-US IP's (Russia, Egypt, Honk Kong, etc).In my analysis I'm 
marking those entries as hacked accounts.

From what I read from your response, vchkpw-smtp (marked as successful in the 
log) entries could be mail sent TO my server FROM another server on port 25. 
That tells me those are probably safe submissions - even if they are from 
overseas IPs. Am I thinking correctly?







 From: Tom Collins t...@tomlogic.com
To: vchkpw@inter7.com 
Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp
 


vchkpw-submission is on port 587, and is typically used for emai clients 
relaying mail.  It's often set up to require authentication.


vchkpw-smtp is on port 25, and can be used for email clients to relay mail, or 
by other servers delivering mail to your server.


-Tom


On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:41 PM, LHTek wrote:

In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between these 2 entries 
(vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)?


example:
Mar  4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission: (PLAIN) login 
success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238

Mar  4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp: (PLAIN) login success 
t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114





 



!DSPAM:5316c7aa34265248780387!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp

[Tom Collins]

The submission entries outside the US could very well be from hacked accounts.

I'm finding a surprising number of compromised accounts (once a week?), 
including users with good passwords, so I have to assume they're snooped on 
public wireless, or their computers are compromised by malware of some sort.

The vckpw-smtp entries from outside the US are probably also hacked accounts, 
since mail received from remote servers doesn't include authentication.  Sorry 
I wasn't thinking clearly in my previous response -- I forgot these were vchkpw 
entries and are only related to authentication.  I was thinking about qmail 
logs.

-Tom


On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:43 PM, LHTek wrote:

 Thanks for the reply.
 
 NOTE: None of my users will have sent anything from outside the US.
 
 I've got some log entries for vchkpw-submission (marked as successful in the 
 log) with non-US IP's (Russia, Egypt, Honk Kong, etc). In my analysis I'm 
 marking those entries as hacked accounts.
 
 From what I read from your response, vchkpw-smtp (marked as successful in the 
 log) entries could be mail sent TO my server FROM another server on port 25. 
 That tells me those are probably safe submissions - even if they are from 
 overseas IPs. Am I thinking correctly?
 
 
 
 
 From: Tom Collins t...@tomlogic.com
 To: vchkpw@inter7.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 12:02 AM
 Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Qmail maillog vchkpw-submission vs vchkpw-smtp
 
 vchkpw-submission is on port 587, and is typically used for emai clients 
 relaying mail.  It's often set up to require authentication.
 
 vchkpw-smtp is on port 25, and can be used for email clients to relay mail, 
 or by other servers delivering mail to your server.
 
 -Tom
 
 
 On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:41 PM, LHTek wrote:
 
 In the /var/log/maillog file what is the difference between these 2 entries 
 (vchkpw-submission, vchkpw-smtp)?
 
 example:
 Mar  4 17:27:03 michael vpopmail[14701]: vchkpw-submission: (PLAIN) login 
 success t...@domain.com:64.185.3.238
 Mar  4 10:54:42 michael vpopmail[29027]: vchkpw-smtp: (PLAIN) login success 
 t...@domain.com:64.57.239.114
 
 
 
 
 
 



!DSPAM:5316cae034263249811152!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Bug in maildirquota.c

[Simone Lazzaris]

Hi everybody.

I've been hit by a bug in vdelivermail (in maildirquota.c, precisely), and I 
want to share the
resolution I've found.


I've recently upgraded to vpopmail 5.4.33, and we experienced that occasionally 
(once o twice a day) vdelivermail starts looping, eating all the CPU.

An strace on the offending instance resulted in:
read(5, 0xf5e4317, 2963227893)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4316, 2963227894)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4315, 2963227895)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4314, 2963227896)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4313, 2963227897)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4312, 2963227898)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4311, 2963227899)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4310, 2963227900)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e430f, 2963227901)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e430e, 2963227902)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e430d, 2963227903)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e430c, 2963227904)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
...
...

The file descriptor number 5 of that process is pointing at the maildirsize 
file of the mailbox, and is marked as deleted in /proc/procid/fd

We store the mail in a NetApp NFS share, without locking for performance 
reasons, and I think I've found the problem:
the file is deleted by someone else while vdelivermail is reading it.

In maildirquota.c, function maildirsize_read, there is a while loop that reads:
while (l)
{
n=read(f, p, l);
if (n  0)
{

But n is defined as a unsigned int (64 bit) , so even if read returns a 
negative value (error) the if is never trigged.

So I've made this patch:
--- maildirquota.c.orig 2014-01-31 12:21:22.0 +0100
+++ maildirquota.c  2014-01-31 12:08:47.0 +0100
@@ -337,7 +337,6 @@
  int f;
  char *p;
  unsigned l;
- storage_t n;
  int first;
  int ret = 0;
 
@@ -360,15 +359,16 @@
 
while (l)
{
-   n=read(f, p, l);
-   if (n  0)
+   ssize_t nr;
+   nr=read(f, p, l);
+   if (nr  0)
{
close(f);
return (-1);
}
-   if (n == 0) break;
-   p += n;
-   l -= n;
+   if (nr == 0)break;
+   p += nr;
+   l -= nr;
}
if (l == 0 || ret)  /* maildir too big */
{

which fixes the problem.


Any chance to incorporate the fix in the next version ?


Thanks


-- 
Simone Lazzaris
QCom S.p.A.

!DSPAM:52eb8a1334261024417156!

[vchkpw] [SPAM] Bug in maildirquota.c

[Simone Lazzaris]

Hi everybody.

I've been hit by a bug in vdelivermail (in maildirquota.c, precisely), and I 
want to share the
resolution I've found.


I've recently upgraded to vpopmail 5.4.33, and we experienced that occasionally 
(once o twice a day) vdelivermail starts looping, eating all the CPU.

An strace on the offending instance resulted in:
read(5, 0xf5e4317, 2963227893)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4316, 2963227894)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4315, 2963227895)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4314, 2963227896)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4313, 2963227897)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4312, 2963227898)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4311, 2963227899)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e4310, 2963227900)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e430f, 2963227901)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e430e, 2963227902)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e430d, 2963227903)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
read(5, 0xf5e430c, 2963227904)  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
...
...

The file descriptor number 5 of that process is pointing at the maildirsize 
file of the mailbox, and is marked as deleted in /proc/procid/fd

We store the mail in a NetApp NFS share, without locking for performance 
reasons, and I think I've found the problem:
the file is deleted by someone else while vdelivermail is reading it.

In maildirquota.c, function maildirsize_read, there is a while loop that reads:
while (l)
{
n=read(f, p, l);
if (n  0)
{

But n is defined as a unsigned int (64 bit) , so even if read returns a 
negative value (error) the if is never trigged.

So I've made this patch:
--- maildirquota.c.orig 2014-01-31 12:21:22.0 +0100
+++ maildirquota.c  2014-01-31 12:08:47.0 +0100
@@ -337,7 +337,6 @@
  int f;
  char *p;
  unsigned l;
- storage_t n;
  int first;
  int ret = 0;
 
@@ -360,15 +359,16 @@
 
while (l)
{
-   n=read(f, p, l);
-   if (n  0)
+   ssize_t nr;
+   nr=read(f, p, l);
+   if (nr  0)
{
close(f);
return (-1);
}
-   if (n == 0) break;
-   p += n;
-   l -= n;
+   if (nr == 0)break;
+   p += nr;
+   l -= nr;
}
if (l == 0 || ret)  /* maildir too big */
{

which fixes the problem.


Any chance to incorporate the fix in the next version ?


Thanks


-- 
Simone Lazzaris
QCom S.p.A.

!DSPAM:52eb8b0234261033718879!

Re: [vchkpw] Bug in maildirquota.c

[Matt Brookings]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 01/31/2014 05:34 AM, Simone Lazzaris wrote:
 The file descriptor number 5 of that process is pointing at the maildirsize 
 file of the mailbox,
 and is marked as deleted in /proc/procid/fd
 
 We store the mail in a NetApp NFS share, without locking for performance 
 reasons, and I think
 I've found the problem: the file is deleted by someone else while 
 vdelivermail is reading it.

You can correct this particular issue by making sure you're mounting with at 
least NFS v3, and that
the time on the two systems is synchronized.  NFS v4 would, of course, be 
better.

 
 In maildirquota.c, function maildirsize_read, there is a while loop that 
 reads: while (l) { 
 n=read(f, p, l); if (n  0) {
 
 But n is defined as a unsigned int (64 bit) , so even if read returns a 
 negative value (error)
 the if is never trigged.

I've made note of this.
Thanks for the report!
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com   GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS69n9AAoJEOjQVexigXNz1JMH/0WvMHTImzOWfHr980YVcmtB
0IFAAKn6PHUP57y2wm+cJ/+uEu9vz9YMOHRpQK/aoBu9kIzQHRF2GGvj0eSnuh7v
1+LqwB1X3j3dDdNiMHtC6rjFkueuDG/fNZ5r8YfHTc+azl5lhiFRZz9nqSuPjShq
ZAU0TYXBU1wd3/0LvRvA9mAltbJs0CWgE1s/ht0r4bZv+b4Fq4Gy2alKN0bijCgu
145bIDhDbrczlp2Vmz8USEZJsTJj2SjxWRcFRha5VYP0zgmFAdrcKNdAESkEWVV3
hcMz15N870OSA21ZAEwd/rppG8rZf5sCRWOuqJRg1WrtTuEZdYqSKt5vAJ3eShE=
=qtFi
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [vchkpw] Bug in maildirquota.c

[FBBE -- INTERNET]

Cher Client,

Nous avons bien reçu votre e-mail et nous vous en remercions. Nos 
collaborateurs le traiteront aussi rapidement que possible.

Attention : ceci est une réponse automatique. Vous ne pouvez donc pas y 
répondre.

Veuillez agréer nos salutations distinguées. 

BNP Paribas Fortis SA
T : +32(0)2 762 20 00
Montagne du Parc 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Bruxelles | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Geachte klant,

Wij hebben uw e-mail goed ontvangen, waarvoor dank. Onze medewerkers zullen uw 
vraag zo snel mogelijk beantwoorden.

Opgelet : dit is een automatisch bericht. Hierop kan u geen antwoord versturen.

Met vriendelijke groeten,

BNP Paribas Fortis NV
T : +32(0)2 762 60 00
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Dear customer,

We hereby acknowledge receipt of your e-mail. Thank you. Our staff will answer 
your query as soon as possible.

Careful: This is an automatic message. Please do not reply.

Yours sincerely,

BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV
T : +32(0)2 261 11 11
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussels | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Sehr geehrte Kundin, sehr geehrter Kunde,

Wir danken Ihnen für Ihre E-Mail. Unsere Mitarbeiter werden Ihnen so schnell 
wie möglich antworten.

Achtung: dies ist eine automatische Nachricht. Sie können sie folglich nicht 
beantworten.

Freundliche Grüße

BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV
T : +32(0)2 261 11 11
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be

- Original Message -
From: Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 11:14:37 AM GMT-06:00
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Bug in maildirquota.c

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 01/31/2014 05:34 AM, Simone Lazzaris wrote:
 The file descriptor number 5 of that process is pointing at the maildirsize 
 file of the mailbox,
 and is marked as deleted in /proc/procid/fd
 
 We store the mail in a NetApp NFS share, without locking for performance 
 reasons, and I think
 I've found the problem: the file is deleted by someone else while 
 vdelivermail is reading it.

You can correct this particular issue by making sure you're mounting with at 
least NFS v3, and that
the time on the two systems is synchronized.  NFS v4 would, of course, be 
better.

 
 In maildirquota.c, function maildirsize_read, there is a while loop that 
 reads: while (l) { 
 n=read(f, p, l); if (n  0) {
 
 But n is defined as a unsigned int (64 bit) , so even if read returns a 
 negative value (error)
 the if is never trigged.

I've made note of this.
Thanks for the report!
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com   GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS69n9AAoJEOjQVexigXNz1JMH/0WvMHTImzOWfHr980YVcmtB
0IFAAKn6PHUP57y2wm+cJ/+uEu9vz9YMOHRpQK/aoBu9kIzQHRF2GGvj0eSnuh7v
1+LqwB1X3j3dDdNiMHtC6rjFkueuDG/fNZ5r8YfHTc+azl5lhiFRZz9nqSuPjShq
ZAU0TYXBU1wd3/0LvRvA9mAltbJs0CWgE1s/ht0r4bZv+b4Fq4Gy2alKN0bijCgu
145bIDhDbrczlp2Vmz8USEZJsTJj2SjxWRcFRha5VYP0zgmFAdrcKNdAESkEWVV3
hcMz15N870OSA21ZAEwd/rppG8rZf5sCRWOuqJRg1WrtTuEZdYqSKt5vAJ3eShE=
=qtFi
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
==
BNP Paribas Fortis disclaimer:
http://www.bnpparibasfortis.com/e-mail-disclaimer.html
 
BNP Paribas Fortis privacy policy:
http://www.bnpparibasfortis.com/privacy-policy.html
 
==


!DSPAM:52ebda6c34266182745334!

Re: [vchkpw] Bug in maildirquota.c

[FBBE -- INTERNET]

Geachte mevrouw,
Geachte heer,

Wij hebben uw e-mail goed ontvangen en wij bedanken u hiervoor. Onze 
medewerkers beantwoorden deze zo spoedig mogelijk.

Opgelet: dit is een automatisch bericht. Alvast bedankt om hierop niet te 
antwoorden.

Hoogachtend. 

BNP Paribas Fortis NV
T : +32(0)2 762 60 00
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be

- Original Message -
From: FBBE -- INTERNET i...@bnpparibasfortis.be
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 6:16:54 PM GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Bug in maildirquota.c

Cher Client,

Nous avons bien reçu votre e-mail et nous vous en remercions. Nos 
collaborateurs le traiteront aussi rapidement que possible.

Attention : ceci est une réponse automatique. Vous ne pouvez donc pas y 
répondre.

Veuillez agréer nos salutations distinguées. 

BNP Paribas Fortis SA
T : +32(0)2 762 20 00
Montagne du Parc 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Bruxelles | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Geachte klant,

Wij hebben uw e-mail goed ontvangen, waarvoor dank. Onze medewerkers zullen uw 
vraag zo snel mogelijk beantwoorden.

Opgelet : dit is een automatisch bericht. Hierop kan u geen antwoord versturen.

Met vriendelijke groeten,

BNP Paribas Fortis NV
T : +32(0)2 762 60 00
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Dear customer,

We hereby acknowledge receipt of your e-mail. Thank you. Our staff will answer 
your query as soon as possible.

Careful: This is an automatic message. Please do not reply.

Yours sincerely,

BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV
T : +32(0)2 261 11 11
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussels | www.bnpparibasfortis.be



Sehr geehrte Kundin, sehr geehrter Kunde,

Wir danken Ihnen für Ihre E-Mail. Unsere Mitarbeiter werden Ihnen so schnell 
wie möglich antworten.

Achtung: dies ist eine automatische Nachricht. Sie können sie folglich nicht 
beantworten.

Freundliche Grüße

BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV
T : +32(0)2 261 11 11
Warandeberg 3, 1QA5E, 1000 Brussel | www.bnpparibasfortis.be

- Original Message -
From: Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 11:14:37 AM GMT-06:00
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Bug in maildirquota.c

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 01/31/2014 05:34 AM, Simone Lazzaris wrote:
 The file descriptor number 5 of that process is pointing at the maildirsize 
 file of the mailbox,
 and is marked as deleted in /proc/procid/fd
 
 We store the mail in a NetApp NFS share, without locking for performance 
 reasons, and I think
 I've found the problem: the file is deleted by someone else while 
 vdelivermail is reading it.

You can correct this particular issue by making sure you're mounting with at 
least NFS v3, and that
the time on the two systems is synchronized.  NFS v4 would, of course, be 
better.

 
 In maildirquota.c, function maildirsize_read, there is a while loop that 
 reads: while (l) { 
 n=read(f, p, l); if (n  0) {
 
 But n is defined as a unsigned int (64 bit) , so even if read returns a 
 negative value (error)
 the if is never trigged.

I've made note of this.
Thanks for the report!
- -- 
/*
Matt Brookings m...@inter7.com   GnuPG Key 62817373
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS69n9AAoJEOjQVexigXNz1JMH/0WvMHTImzOWfHr980YVcmtB
0IFAAKn6PHUP57y2wm+cJ/+uEu9vz9YMOHRpQK/aoBu9kIzQHRF2GGvj0eSnuh7v
1+LqwB1X3j3dDdNiMHtC6rjFkueuDG/fNZ5r8YfHTc+azl5lhiFRZz9nqSuPjShq
ZAU0TYXBU1wd3/0LvRvA9mAltbJs0CWgE1s/ht0r4bZv+b4Fq4Gy2alKN0bijCgu
145bIDhDbrczlp2Vmz8USEZJsTJj2SjxWRcFRha5VYP0zgmFAdrcKNdAESkEWVV3
hcMz15N870OSA21ZAEwd/rppG8rZf5sCRWOuqJRg1WrtTuEZdYqSKt5vAJ3eShE=
=qtFi
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
==
BNP Paribas Fortis disclaimer:
http://www.bnpparibasfortis.com/e-mail-disclaimer.html
 
BNP Paribas Fortis privacy policy:
http://www.bnpparibasfortis.com/privacy-policy.html
 
==




!DSPAM:52ebdae734264145785232!

Re: [vchkpw] [SPAM] Re: vusaged compile error

[Marcello Lupo]

Hi Eric,

i have it under:

libvpopmail_a-vpopmail.o:
U vauth_getpw
libvpopmail_a-vauth.o:
0caa T vauth_getpw
libvpopmail_a-vutil.o:
U vauth_getpw

So i think it is ok.
Thank you
Bye
Marcello


Il giorno 14/dic/2013, alle ore 03:01, Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net ha 
scritto:

 On 12/13/2013 04:31 PM, Marcello Lupo wrote:
 Hi,
 I have all correct I think.
 
 /home/vpopmail/etc/lib_deps contains:
 
 -L/home/vpopmail/lib -lvpopmail -Xlinker -R -Xlinker /usr/lib/mysql 
 -L/usr/lib/mysql  -lmysqlclient -lz -lm -lcrypt
 
 So it is correct.
 
 If you see in my log:
 
 checking for ev.h... yes
 checking for ev_loop_new in -lev... yes
 checking vpopmail.h usability... yes
 checking vpopmail.h presence... yes
 checking for vpopmail.h... yes
 checking vauth.h usability... yes
 checking vauth.h presence... yes
 checking for vauth.h... yes
 checking for vauth_getpw in -lvpopmail... no
 checking for vauth_getall in -lvpopmail... no
 checking for get_domain_entries in -lvpopmail... no
 checking for client_query_quick in -lvpopmail... yes
 configure: error: No vauth_getpw in libvpopmail
 
 The line before the error is checking for client_query_quick in -lvpopmail… 
 yes” so the configure found correctly the library. I think we have to focus 
 on the way the check for vauth_getpw is done or x86_64 or ubuntu 
 distribution issue.
 
 I tried to do with the default ./configure (without any option) and the 
 result is the same.
 
 Thank you for your time.
 Bye
 Marcello
 
 Sorry I didn't notice that earlier Marcello. You're correct, it is apparently 
 finding a vpopmail library.
 
 If you nm libvpopmail.a | less, do you find/see the missing vauth_ 
 functions? I show them under both the libvpopmail_a-vpopmail.o: and 
 libvpopmail_a-vauth.o: sections. If you don't see them then there's a problem 
 with your make of libvpopmail.a, as you suspect. If you do see them, then it 
 appears that your libvpopmail.a isn't being picked up for some reason (the 
 lib_deps file is silently not being found).
 
 Which is it?
 
 -- 
 -Eric 'shubes'
 
 
 
 


!DSPAM:52ac2da134269935620071!