Hmmm... it looks like spamdyke isn't removing the "AUTH=" line, which is
coming from your qmail.
I'll get that fixed. Thanks for reporting this!
-- Sam Clippinger
Youri Kravatsky wrote:
> Hello, Sam!
>
> Your new version 4.0.5 working like charm concerning bug that
> I've reported. Only one small thing remained TODO - now I don't have
> MD5 authentication, and in /etc/spamdyke.conf said, that
> authentication is always, not always-encrypted. I really do not have
> MD5 authentication (still), but Spamdyke offers it, and, obviously,
> some mail clients like TheBat! first of all are trying to make SMTP
> auth through MD5, but it fails, so they continue through plain auth
> and it succeeds. Some part of log of REMOTE server (spamdyke is set at
> margosha.ru):
>
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: ----------
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: Session 9018; child 20
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: Parsing message
> <c:\mdaemon\remoteq\pd50000216711.msg>
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: * From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: * To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: * Subject: test from EIMZB
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: * Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: Attempting SMTP connection to [targetdomain.ru]
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: Resolving MX records for [targetdomain.ru]
> (DNS Server: 194.226.21.65)...
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: * P=010 S=000 D=targetdomain.ru TTL=(55)
> MX=[targetdomain.ru] {89.108.80.21}
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: Attempting SMTP connection to [89.108.80.21:25]
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: Waiting for socket connection...
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: * Connection established (194.226.21.65:2045
> -> 89.108.80.21:25)
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:06: Waiting for protocol to start...
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 220 targetdomain.ru ESMTP
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: --> EHLO mx.domain.ru
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 250-targetdomain.ru
>
>
>>>>>>>>>> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 250-AUTH LOGIN PLAIN
>>>>>>>>>> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 250-AUTH=LOGIN CRAM-MD5 PLAIN
>>>>>>>>>>
>
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 250-PIPELINING
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 250 8BITMIME
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: --> MAIL From:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 250 ok
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: --> RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 250 ok
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: --> DATA
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 354 go ahead
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: Sending
> <c:\mdaemon\remoteq\pd50000216711.msg> to [89.108.80.21]
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: Transfer Complete
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 250 ok 1223968322 qp 64946
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: --> QUIT
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: <-- 221 targetdomain.ru
> Tue 2008-10-14 11:12:08: SMTP session successful (Bytes in/out: 189/1550)
>
> Here you can see that there is TWO strings with auth. offering. Does
> it not see strange?
> Probably, you should consider some new option something like "AUTH
> LIST", where admin can put types of authentication that he want to
> use? Moreover, it seems to me, that authentication plain and MD5
> requires different smtp-auth-command? One for plain auth, and one for
> MD5? You could ask me why? I reply that some users, errrr, stupid, and
> happy, and don't want to change anything in their setup at all. So
> anyway we should maintain both plain and MD5 auth.
>
>
_______________________________________________
spamdyke-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
