Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
* Zachary Bedell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-05-29 02:20]:
I'm not sure if vPopMail would return account found if you asked for
alex-foo. I don't have --enable-qmail-ext set on my server right now.
If you have a sec, could you compile vpopaccountexists on your system
and see what it returns? Call it as:
./vpopaccountexists [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; echo $?
If you see a 1 on the next line, then my code will handle those
addresses by virtue of vPopMail handling them for me.
It returns 0.
You can do something like what you see in the attached diff (stolen code
from vdelivermail.c) to have this work properly.
BTW, I had to add -lcrypt to the compilation of vpopaccountexists (from
makevpopaccountexists), else my compilation fails.
Alex
--
Alex Pleiner
zeitform Internet Dienste Fraunhoferstrasse 5
64283 Darmstadt, Germany
http://www.zeitform.deTel.: +49 (0)6151 155-635
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Fax: +49 (0)6151 155-634
GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0x613C21EA
--- vpopaccountexists.c-orig2004-06-01 14:56:58.0 +0200
+++ vpopaccountexists.c 2004-06-01 15:07:02.0 +0200
@@ -43,11 +43,12 @@
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
char User[MAX_BUFF];
+char UserExt[MAX_BUFF];
char Domain[MAX_BUFF];
char DomainPath[MAX_BUFF];
char *dotqmailpath;
struct stat sb;
- int ret, fd;
+ int ret, fd, i;
// Missing or invalid email address. Return qmail error code.
if(argc != 2 || parse_email(argv[1], User, Domain, MAX_BUFF) != 0) exit(111);
@@ -59,6 +60,15 @@
// Check for a real vpopmail account:
if(vauth_getpw(User, Domain) != NULL) exit(1); // Found a matching mailbox
+
+// handle qmail-ext
+for(i = 0; User[i] != 0; i++) {
+ if (User[i] == '-' ) break;
+ UserExt[i] = User[i];
+ }
+UserExt[i] = 0;
+if ( is_username_valid(UserExt) != 0 ) { vexit(100); }
+ if(vauth_getpw(UserExt, Domain) != NULL) exit(1); // Found a matching mailbox
// Check for a vpopmail alias (in valias table)
if(valias_select(User, Domain) != NULL) exit(1); // Found an alias
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
* Zachary Bedell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-05-27 23:34]: I used the GPL'd patches from interazioni.it as inspiration and to get an idea of how to go about hacking what I needed into qmail-smtpd.c. You can find my patches along with detailed descriptions here: https://mail.adirondack.net/?p20 Zachary, interesting. I like the idea of calling an external program for checking user existance. Does your vpopaccountexists handle the follwowing situations? 1. --enable-qmail-ext=y POP3-Acoount is [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCPT is [EMAIL PROTECTED] .qmail-default contains bounce-no-mailbox Will the mail be delivered? This also will apply to TMDA IIRC. 2. Comments in .qmail-default .qmail-default contains ---snip--- # | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' bounce-no-mailbox | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' /home/vpopmail/domains/domain.de/user ---snap--- Will vpopaccountexists recognise the comment? After all, maybe the vpopmail-team should consider adding a tool like yours to the official vpopmail dist. just my $.02 Alex -- Alex Pleiner zeitform Internet Dienste Fraunhoferstrasse 5 64283 Darmstadt, Germany http://www.zeitform.deTel.: +49 (0)6151 155-635 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Fax: +49 (0)6151 155-634 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0x613C21EA
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
On May 28, 2004, at 2:52 AM, Alex Pleiner wrote: After all, maybe the vpopmail-team should consider adding a tool like yours to the official vpopmail dist. I think this would be a very good idea. That way, it would be possible to code a version for a non-vpopmail system as well, and the patch to qmail could be used my more people (and ultimately reviewed by more people). It keeps the changes to qmail minimal, and allows for compiling new versions of vpopmail without having to recompile/reinstall qmail. Perhaps a name like vvalidaddr would be more accurate, as you want it to respond positively for all types of accounts. I had discussed this on the dev list a while back, and mentioned that it would be helpful to have multiple exit codes for different conditions: - temporary failure (try again later) - account does not exist - account exists - account exists but is over quota Hey! That solves a request recently posted to the list, temporarily bounce email for over-quota users! -- Tom Collins - [EMAIL PROTECTED] QmailAdmin: http://qmailadmin.sf.net/ Vpopmail: http://vpopmail.sf.net/ Info on the Sniffter hand-held Network Tester: http://sniffter.com/
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 28, 2004, at 5:52 AM, Alex Pleiner wrote: 1. --enable-qmail-ext=y POP3-Acoount is [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCPT is [EMAIL PROTECTED] .qmail-default contains bounce-no-mailbox Will the mail be delivered? This also will apply to TMDA IIRC. I'm not sure if vPopMail would return account found if you asked for alex-foo. I don't have --enable-qmail-ext set on my server right now. If you have a sec, could you compile vpopaccountexists on your system and see what it returns? Call it as: ./vpopaccountexists [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; echo $? If you see a 1 on the next line, then my code will handle those addresses by virtue of vPopMail handling them for me. I don't do any special checking for addresses like that right now. One of my earlier hacks would accept mail for anything with a hyphen in the User portion so as to allow mailing lists. I commented that out when I added proper (or at least better) checking for .qmail-alias files. 2. Comments in .qmail-default .qmail-default contains ---snip--- # | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' bounce-no-mailbox | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' /home/vpopmail/domains/domain.de/user ---snap--- Will vpopaccountexists recognise the comment? That's a known problem with my code at the moment. The catch-all wouldn't receive any mail in that case. I added a note to that effect to the web pages I created after I posted the link yesterday. My parsing of .qmail files could definitely stand to improve. After all, maybe the vpopmail-team should consider adding a tool like yours to the official vpopmail dist. It would be wonderful if the vpopmail folks wanted to take that part off my hands! Best regards, Zac Bedell == Brought to you by MacOS, running on host Aramis Running for: 1 day, 3 hours, 47 minutes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkC31fgACgkQq+EtLVpY/F6JxgCgp2Sb5qu6beG+sBI23DdBewOV OhQAnArrrcxxoppmSLN5kqrVbHS5BY4l =SQFt -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 28, 2004, at 10:28 AM, Tom Collins wrote: Perhaps a name like vvalidaddr would be more accurate, as you want it to respond positively for all types of accounts. I had discussed this on the dev list a while back, and mentioned that it would be helpful to have multiple exit codes for different conditions: - temporary failure (try again later) - account does not exist - account exists - account exists but is over quota I'll look into adding a quota check. That makes sense and would certainly avoid a lot of unnecessary queuing of mail that's only going to bounce anyways. I already return 111 if there's any kind of failure in the program (temp failure) and of course exists or doesn't-exist are returned as 1 or 0 respectively. Best regards, Zac Bedell == Brought to you by MacOS, running on host Aramis Running for: 1 day, 4 hours, 03 minutes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkC316cACgkQq+EtLVpY/F7RsACePM2ZXxbvJIwdRM7vNzwyawGk tycAn3vmUf8EtViZ/1m5nsv0snUCtEKD =v1jd -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
Tobias, it looks like there is a trust against this patch, just saying generically it's ugly, but not beeing able to say why, and not beeing able, mainly, to make another one working. This patch is highly responding to DJ security and programming models, while all the rest around (including vpopmail) is not, so all the attacks are without comprension (or people attacking does not understand what is speaking about). This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. This patch has also be included in other bigger containers, like Bill Shupp megapatch and Matt Simerson Toaster. I'm old and experienced enought to understand the real skills of people, and what's working and what not. If you install the patch and use it, you'll learn another way to know and trust people: by judging their work, and not their words. Tonino At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: Hi list, I found a patch [1] at [2] which enables qmail to first check against vpopmail if the user (email-address) is existant before accepting mail for it. Yesterday I asked in #qmail (IRC-channel) for any experiences and/or recommendations with this patch and have been told by Jeremy Kitchen that this patch is UGLY and HORRIBLE and has glibc-stuff in it. As he seems to have a little bit more experience than me, I trust him. :-) Anyway, I am still looking for a solution for this problem, maybe a solution which also checks if catch-all is activated for this domain. Right now we make the experience that a lot of spam and virus-mails are coming in and make the queue growing up enormously. I hope on the new systems, it will not be that bad by applying the ext-todo patch against the silly-qmail-syndrome, but I want these machines making be a little bit more secure. Because of the fact, that this solution would be a patch or anything else against vpopmail (maybe activating this functionality in qmail-smtp), I didn't ask in the qmail-list and hope this is the right place... Greetings Tobias [1] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/easy-way-1.0.patch [2] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/#qmail-smtpd [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- La tua posta elettronica senza virus su UfficioPostale.IT Your virus free electronic mail on UfficioPostale.IT
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2004 11:26 schrieb Tonix: Tobias, it looks like there is a trust against this patch, just saying generically it's ugly, but not beeing able to say why, and not beeing able, mainly, to make another one working. This patch is highly responding to DJ security and programming models, while all the rest around (including vpopmail) is not, so all the attacks are without comprension (or people attacking does not understand what is speaking about). Thats why I asked on the list. I never worked with this patch and have no experience in coding to analyze if it is crap or not. This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. Good to hear. Are there any facts how much it would decrease performance lets say at about 800-1000 smtp-connections per minute? This patch has also be included in other bigger containers, like Bill Shupp megapatch and Matt Simerson Toaster. Good to know... I'm old and experienced enought to understand the real skills of people, and what's working and what not. ok If you install the patch and use it, you'll learn another way to know and trust people: by judging their work, and not their words. I learned it already. Like I worte: One person out of millions said... Another experience I made is to ask other people for experiences _before_ I do something, especially before installing software or applying patches to systems which are essential and have to run properly. Tonino [...] Another question: Does this patch look, if there is a catch-all for the domain? Is there anything to take care of when using vpopmail with MySQL in conjunction with this patch? Greetings Tobias -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQFAtbnubZe1CSCwYlARAps0AJIDIsojcRZ8RVR/oW5TvXSifTewAJ4j0xE3 wkRllBi0MGBCeNfF+Ih0aw== =t8nn -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
* Tonix [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-05-27 11:31]: This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. Tonino, I appreciate your work and use the patch in some production systems with success. But there is at least one problem that can be considered as bug. if you use comments in .qmail-default like in: #| /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' bounce-no-mailbox | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' /home/vpopmail/domains/domain.de/user your patch recognizes bounce-no-mailbox which is wrong. This problem won't occur if you avoid changing .qmail-files by hand (using comments). BTW, some time ago you promised a surprise. Can we expect a new version of chkusr? Alex -- Alex Pleiner zeitform Internet Dienste Fraunhoferstrasse 5 64283 Darmstadt, Germany http://www.zeitform.deTel.: +49 (0)6151 155-635 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Fax: +49 (0)6151 155-634 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0x613C21EA
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
Alex, At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: .. But there is at least one problem that can be considered as bug. if you use comments in .qmail-default like in: #| /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' bounce-no-mailbox | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' /home/vpopmail/domains/domain.de/user your patch recognizes bounce-no-mailbox which is wrong. This problem won't occur if you avoid changing .qmail-files by hand (using comments). You're right, but I don't see it as a bug (that piece of code replied - at that time - qmailadmin way of examining bouncing). Using a commented line is a workaround for maildrop users, so if I avoid commented lines for them is bad. Ok, ... I'll have to study and add some #define to next version, or add an external reference file (I'ld like to avoid any new file). What do you think about ? BTW, some time ago you promised a surprise. Can we expect a new version of chkusr? I'm planning a new version, with unified and simplified installation and some new features (like quota checking and basic filtering), but I lack time to work on it... Hope within the summer. Ciao, Tonino Alex -- Alex Pleiner zeitform Internet Dienste Fraunhoferstrasse 5 64283 Darmstadt, Germany http://www.zeitform.de Tel.: +49 (0)6151 155-635 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +49 (0)6151 155-634 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0x613C21EA [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Another question: Does this patch look, if there is a catch-all for the domain? Yes, does look for catchall, aliases, mailing lists. Is there anything to take care of when using vpopmail with MySQL in conjunction with this patch? Just modify accordingly your Makefile. Ciao, Tonino -END PGP SIGNATURE- [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
I don't have that load, so I can't say. For my needs, routine is practically not existent, and far much less heavy than qmail-scanner. For sure your outgoing queue will be reduced, and your network traffic will drop (because all wrong messages will be stopped before entering). Just you'll have to increase max SQL connections, because each message recipient will be validated and need an SQL connection (chkuser - vpopmail - MySQL). Ciao, Tonino At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Good to hear. Are there any facts how much it would decrease performance lets say at about 800-1000 smtp-connections per minute? -END PGP SIGNATURE- [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- La tua posta elettronica senza virus su UfficioPostale.IT Your virus free electronic mail on UfficioPostale.IT
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
Hi, I have nothing but great things to say about Tonix's patch and the code is quite straight forward to read, even for an old C programmer like me. I use it personally and have it installed on more than 20 ISP and end user systems with no problems. Regards, Rick Tonix wrote: Tobias, it looks like there is a trust against this patch, just saying generically it's ugly, but not beeing able to say why, and not beeing able, mainly, to make another one working. This patch is highly responding to DJ security and programming models, while all the rest around (including vpopmail) is not, so all the attacks are without comprension (or people attacking does not understand what is speaking about). This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. This patch has also be included in other bigger containers, like Bill Shupp megapatch and Matt Simerson Toaster. I'm old and experienced enought to understand the real skills of people, and what's working and what not. If you install the patch and use it, you'll learn another way to know and trust people: by judging their work, and not their words. Tonino At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: Hi list, I found a patch [1] at [2] which enables qmail to first check against vpopmail if the user (email-address) is existant before accepting mail for it. Yesterday I asked in #qmail (IRC-channel) for any experiences and/or recommendations with this patch and have been told by Jeremy Kitchen that this patch is UGLY and HORRIBLE and has glibc-stuff in it. As he seems to have a little bit more experience than me, I trust him. :-) Anyway, I am still looking for a solution for this problem, maybe a solution which also checks if catch-all is activated for this domain. Right now we make the experience that a lot of spam and virus-mails are coming in and make the queue growing up enormously. I hope on the new systems, it will not be that bad by applying the ext-todo patch against the silly-qmail-syndrome, but I want these machines making be a little bit more secure. Because of the fact, that this solution would be a patch or anything else against vpopmail (maybe activating this functionality in qmail-smtp), I didn't ask in the qmail-list and hope this is the right place... Greetings Tobias [1] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/easy-way-1.0.patch [2] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/#qmail-smtpd [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- La tua posta elettronica senza virus su UfficioPostale.IT Your virus free electronic mail on UfficioPostale.IT
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
On Thursday 27 May 2004 04:26 am, Tonix wrote: Tobias, it looks like there is a trust against this patch, just saying generically it's ugly, but not beeing able to say why, and not beeing able, mainly, to make another one working. This patch is highly responding to DJ security and programming models, while all the rest around (including vpopmail) is not, so all the attacks are without comprension (or people attacking does not understand what is speaking about). *ahem* +#include stdio.h This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. I continually see reports of 'false positives' on this mailing list. Not to mention my first experience with this patch it wasn't even a unified diff, therefore I had to apply it against a fresh qmail tarball and make a real diff out of it before I could apply it against the qmail tarball I was building. I don't like how it determines the 'catchall' either, however, that's not a problem with the patch, that's a problem with how vpopmail determines how it's supposed to handle deliveries to unknown user accounts/aliases. -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ Systems Administrator ++ Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ++ www.inter7.com ++ 866.528.3530 ++ 847.492.0470 int'l kitchen @ #qmail #gentoo on EFnet ++ scriptkitchen.com/qmail
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 -0500, you wrote: On Thursday 27 May 2004 04:26 am, Tonix wrote: *ahem* +#include stdio.h *ahem* If you comment out this line, you have this compilation error: In file included from qmail-smtpd.c:45: /vpopmail/include/vpopmail.h:133: syntax error before `*' This is the guilty 133 line, inside vpopmail.h: struct vqpasswd *vgetent(FILE *); It looks like my patch needs stdio.h only because vpopmail needs it. So, does Ken know your opinion about his writing UGLY and HORRIBLE code with glibc-stuff inside? *ahem* This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. I continually see reports of 'false positives' on this mailing list. This is a MySQL fault, with vpopmail NOT handling bad return codes in some core routines. I'll ask, nextly, to join the development group and develop a robust subset of calls solving this problem (for all, not only for chkuser). Not to mention my first experience with this patch it wasn't even a unified diff, therefore I had to apply it against a fresh qmail tarball and make a real diff out of it before I could apply it against the qmail tarball I was building. I'm not selling this patch, it is just a free patch. And you should know about patching patched sources... I don't like how it determines the 'catchall' either, however, that's not a problem with the patch, that's a problem with how vpopmail determines how it's supposed to handle deliveries to unknown user accounts/aliases. Thanks. Tonino -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ Systems Administrator ++ Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ++ www.inter7.com ++ 866.528.3530 ++ 847.492.0470 int'l kitchen @ #qmail #gentoo on EFnet ++ scriptkitchen.com/qmail [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 27, 2004, at 4:54 AM, Linux-Guru wrote: I found a patch [1] at [2] which enables qmail to first check against vpopmail if the user (email-address) is existant before accepting mail for it. Yesterday I asked in #qmail (IRC-channel) for any experiences and/or recommendations with this patch and have been told by Jeremy Kitchen that this patch is UGLY and HORRIBLE and has glibc-stuff in it. As he seems to have a little bit more experience than me, I trust him. :-) [1] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/easy-way-1.0.patch [2] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/#qmail-smtpd Your message was oddly well timed! I was kind of debating whether to take the time to package my own patch up for the rest of the world, and I guess I might as well. I looked at the patches from interazioni.it, and was unable to get them to compile cleanly (on Gentoo i686). My qmail server serves a small ISP, and it had been dying under the load of unbouncable junk mail. We actually just upgraded the hardware rather significantly, and while I had the chance, I built my own pre-checking scripts for qmail/vpopmail. I used the GPL'd patches from interazioni.it as inspiration and to get an idea of how to go about hacking what I needed into qmail-smtpd.c. You can find my patches along with detailed descriptions here: https://mail.adirondack.net/?p20 These patches don't have any glibc stuff in them, and they do check for catch-all aliases. Best regards, Zac Bedell == pain, n.: Sliding down a 50-foot razor blade into a bucket of alcohol. - -- Brought to you by MacOS, running on host Aramis Running for: 21 hours, 23 minutes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkC2XpUACgkQq+EtLVpY/F5zPQCgwGqqAez+XZ+hNZtTsGMxzlb7 6VsAn23VQ73Kw4Y3tKBUSVn4X5LM00Jn =t++j -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: I'll ask, nextly, to join the development group and develop a robust subset of calls solving this problem (for all, not only for chkuser). Help on vpopmail would be welcome, at least by me, [1] but creating another set of calls is not a good way to handle this problem. As I recall, a major part of your complaint was that you could not tell the difference between not being able to open the database and getting a no answer back from that database. I have already corrected that problem by providing a vauth_open() in every back end. Any program can now verify access to the back end, and most of the ones in ~/vpopmail/bin already do. (This is only in CVS so far. A dev release is in the works...) Please sign up to the SourceFORGE vpopmail list to continue this discussion... http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vpopmail-devel Rick [1] I'm not the one who decides.
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 -0400, you wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 These patches don't have any glibc stuff in them, and they do check for catch-all aliases. Sorry for being picky, but my patch has not internal glibc stuff inside... Just it must call vpopmail, who has glib stuff inside. You patch also is running glibc stuff when executing vpopmail code (internal or external). Anyway, welcome aboard. Ciao, Tonino [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 -0600, you wrote: tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: I'll ask, nextly, to join the development group and develop a robust subset of calls solving this problem (for all, not only for chkuser). Help on vpopmail would be welcome, at least by me, [1] but creating another set of calls is not a good way to handle this problem. As I recall, a major part of your complaint was that you could not tell the difference between not being able to open the database and getting a no answer back from that database. I have already corrected that problem by providing a vauth_open() in every back end. Any program can now verify access to the back end, and most of the ones in ~/vpopmail/bin already do. (This is only in CVS so far. A dev release is in the works...) Please sign up to the SourceFORGE vpopmail list to continue this discussion... http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vpopmail-devel Rick Thanks Rick, I did not know of this new set. I'll update chkuser as this new version is available. Ciao, Tonino [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 27, 2004, at 6:49 PM, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 -0400, you wrote: These patches don't have any glibc stuff in them, and they do check for catch-all aliases. Sorry for being picky, but my patch has not internal glibc stuff inside... Just it must call vpopmail, who has glib stuff inside. You patch also is running glibc stuff when executing vpopmail code (internal or external). True. I may have used poor wording on that. I was referring to the includes to stdio.h and stdlib.h added to qmail-smtpd.c which seem to be the cause of some controversy 'round these parts. =) Anyway, welcome aboard. Many thanks! And also, many thanks for your work. I wouldn't have had a clue without it. Best regards, Zac Bedell == Brought to you by MacOS, running on host Aramis Running for: 1 hours, 57 minutes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkC2aRIACgkQq+EtLVpY/F6f8ACgkrGSWcJF/eDfGK0hXbj09XUM ycwAoPmi2c6E6zg0Ru6sDGcf7S8QVEm0 =0Zw2 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
