On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 03:58:04PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > this will unpack the tarball in local directory.
> > > I use standard debian packages, there's SASL related patch but it doesn't
> > > seem
On June 3, 2022 3:20:31 PM UTC, Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 09:27:15AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>>
>> > >Also can you "apt-get source postfix", and post a link to the tarball?
>> >
>> > this
On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 09:27:15AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> > >Also can you "apt-get source postfix", and post a link to the tarball?
> >
> > this will unpack the tarball in local directory.
> > I use standard
On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 09:27:15AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> The only thing to decide is whether the upstream mechanism behind
> "cyrus_sasl_config_path" should continue to use the simple
> sasl_set_path() API:
>
> https://github.com/cyrusimap/cyrus-sasl/blob/master/include/sasl.h
On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
this will unpack the tarball in local directory.
I use standard debian packages, there's SASL related patch but it doesn't
seem to affect this issue
https://sources.debian.org/patches/postfix/3.5.6-1/
On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 11:09:08AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> >Also can you "apt-get source postfix", and post a link to the tarball?
>
> this will unpack the tarball in local directory.
> I use standard debian packages, there's SASL related patch but it doesn't
> seem to affect
On 02.06.22 08:38, raf wrote:
>No. Perhaps in the past, but no longer. I grepped for
>/etc/postfix/sasl in every file on a debian11 system
>and it didn't appear in libsasl2 or anywhere
>interesting.
On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 03:45:01PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
maybe it uses e.g.
On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 03:45:01PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 02.06.22 08:38, raf wrote:
> >No. Perhaps in the past, but no longer. I grepped for
> >/etc/postfix/sasl in every file on a debian11 system
> >and it didn't appear in libsasl2 or anywhere
> >interesting.
>
> maybe it
On 30/05/22 2:48 pm, raf wrote:
> > If set
> > +empty (the default value) the search path is the one compiled into the
> > +Cyrus SASL library.
>
> I don't think that's entirely correct. On Debian, for
> example, the default value of cyrus_sasl_config_path is
> empty, and /etc/postfix/sasl is
On 2/06/22 10:38 am, raf wrote:
No. Perhaps in the past, but no longer. I grepped for
/etc/postfix/sasl in every file on a debian11 system
and it didn't appear in libsasl2 or anywhere
interesting. It did appear in things like saslfinger
and apparmor rules and the postfix package file list
and
On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 10:44:51PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >No. Perhaps in the past, but no longer. I grepped for
> >/etc/postfix/sasl in every file on a debian11 system
> >and it didn't appear in libsasl2 or anywhere
> >interesting. It did appear in things like saslfinger
> >and apparmor
On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 12:03:43AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 01:35:56PM +1000, raf wrote:
>
> > > So what did they do?
> > >
> > > > $ postconf -d cyrus_sasl_config_path
> > > > cyrus_sasl_config_path =
> > > > $ postconf cyrus_sasl_config_path
> > > >
On June 1, 2022 10:38:55 PM UTC, raf wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 03:56:02PM +1200, Peter wrote:
>
>> On 30/05/22 2:48 pm, raf wrote:
>> > > If set
>> > > +empty (the default value) the search path is the one compiled into the
>> > > +Cyrus SASL library.
>> >
>> > I don't think that's
On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 03:56:02PM +1200, Peter wrote:
> On 30/05/22 2:48 pm, raf wrote:
> > > If set
> > > +empty (the default value) the search path is the one compiled into the
> > > +Cyrus SASL library.
> >
> > I don't think that's entirely correct. On Debian, for
> > example, the default
On Wed, Jun 01, 2022 at 01:35:56PM +1000, raf wrote:
> > So what did they do?
> >
> > > $ postconf -d cyrus_sasl_config_path
> > > cyrus_sasl_config_path =
> > > $ postconf cyrus_sasl_config_path
> > > cyrus_sasl_config_path =
> > > $ dpkg-query -S /etc/postfix/sasl
> > > postfix:
On 30/05/22 2:48 pm, raf wrote:
If set
+empty (the default value) the search path is the one compiled into the
+Cyrus SASL library.
I don't think that's entirely correct. On Debian, for
example, the default value of cyrus_sasl_config_path is
empty, and /etc/postfix/sasl is the directory that
On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 12:15:19AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 12:48:46PM +1000, raf wrote:
>
> > I don't think that's entirely correct. On Debian, for
> > example, the default value of cyrus_sasl_config_path is
> > empty, and /etc/postfix/sasl is the directory that
On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 12:48:46PM +1000, raf wrote:
> I don't think that's entirely correct. On Debian, for
> example, the default value of cyrus_sasl_config_path is
> empty, and /etc/postfix/sasl is the directory that is
> used.
Well, how exactly does that happen? I don't see any patches to
On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 11:25:44AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 10:32:56PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
> > > This might be irrelevant, but the SASL readme mentions
> > > that on some systems Postfix is modified to look for
> > > the Cyrus SASL config in
> On 29 May 2022, at 5:15 pm, Jim Garrison wrote:
>
> One possible suggestion for Postfix: Since it appears Postfix was
> never able to even establish contact with Cyrus SASL, it might be nice
> to detect that condition and provide a different error message than
> just "authentication failed",
On 5/28/2022 7:07 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 05:11:22PM -0700, Jim Garrison wrote:
Foreground saslauthd command, including debug output from
successful testsaslauthd but no log entries corresponding to the
immediately above extract from the Postfix log:
$ sudo
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 10:32:56PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > This might be irrelevant, but the SASL readme mentions
> > that on some systems Postfix is modified to look for
> > the Cyrus SASL config in /etc/postfix/sasl or
> > /var/lib/sasl2. On Debian, it's in /etc/postfix/sasl.
> >
On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 12:12:29PM +1000, raf wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 05:11:22PM -0700, Jim Garrison wrote:
>
> > For completeness here's everything I can think of that could be
> > related:
> >
> > $ ls -ld /etc/sasl2
> > drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 19 00:58 /etc/sasl2
> >
> > $
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 05:11:22PM -0700, Jim Garrison wrote:
> For completeness here's everything I can think of that could be
> related:
>
> $ ls -ld /etc/sasl2
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 19 00:58 /etc/sasl2
>
> $ ls -l /etc/sasl2/
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 62 May 28 18:18 smtpd.conf
>
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 05:11:22PM -0700, Jim Garrison wrote:
> Foreground saslauthd command, including debug output from
> successful testsaslauthd but no log entries corresponding to the
> immediately above extract from the Postfix log:
>
> $ sudo saslauthd -a pam -d -c -m
On 29/05/22 12:11 pm, Jim Garrison wrote:
1) The command I got from an internet post to generate the base64
encoded user/password was incorrect, or intended for a different
version of the echo command. In
$ echo -ne '\000myu...@mydomain.com\000[password]' | base64
bash echo
On 5/28/2022 2:21 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
[ Please respect the "Reply-To" header]
Oops, sorry, will do.
I'm making some progress. I turned on debug tracing in postfix and
saslauthd and made some interesting discoveries:
1) The command I got from an internet post to generate the base64
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 06:22:01PM -0700, Jim Garrison wrote:
> I'm migrating from an ancient Postfix 2.6.6 with SASL 2.1.23 on Centos
> 6 to 3.5.6 with SASL 2.1.27 on Debian 11. I've got everything working
> EXCEPT SASL authentication, and the amount of conflicting information
> on
[ Please respect the "Reply-To" header]
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 12:47:24PM -0700, Jim Garrison wrote:
> On 5/27/2022 8:31 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > Why not just read the SASL_README that comes with Postfix, e.g. at:
> >
> > https://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html
>
> OK, I did just
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 06:22:01PM -0700, Jim Garrison wrote:
> I'm migrating from an ancient Postfix 2.6.6 with SASL 2.1.23 on Centos
> 6 to 3.5.6 with SASL 2.1.27 on Debian 11. I've got everything working
> EXCEPT SASL authentication, and the amount of conflicting information
> on Postfix+SASL
I'm migrating from an ancient Postfix 2.6.6 with SASL 2.1.23 on Centos
6 to 3.5.6 with SASL 2.1.27 on Debian 11. I've got everything working
EXCEPT SASL authentication, and the amount of conflicting information
on Postfix+SASL on the web is rather amazing :-).
I tried reading the Cyrus SASL
31 matches
Mail list logo
