Re: Problem with false-positives for SASL users

[Jamie L. Penman-Smithson]

On 1 Jul 2006, at 00:32, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:

Jamie L. Penman-Smithson wrote:

It's better to look at the 'Authenticated sender':
Received: from bar.example.org (bar.example.org [127.0.0.1])
    (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
    (Client did not present a certificate)
    (Authenticated sender: sender.example.net)
    by foo.example.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A8959ED6B0
    for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:02:00 +0100 (BST)

Do you have a link on how to do this.  I'd like to add it to the wiki.

What do you have to do to get that "Authenticated sender:" line? It's not unpatched Postfix, is it? I know the Wietse was against such info being provided.

You use the smtpd_sasl_authenticated_header option:

smtpd_sasl_authenticated_header (default: no)



    This feature is available in Postfix 2.3 and later.

[main.cf]
smtpd_sasl_authenticated_header = yes

Report the SASL authenticated user name in the smtpd(8) Received message header.

Why can't everyone just support RFC 3848 or mimic Sendmail?!? So much for "drop in replacement". :)

Apparently postfix 2.3 will support auth tokens.

Any link document that?  I'd like to add it to the wiki.

-j

It was a passing comment on a mailing list, I couldn't find anything official from Wietse. I'm not sure whether it is referring to the smtpd_sasl_authenticated_header option in 2.3, since I don't know how different this is to sendmail's auth tokens?

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part