On 09/15/2015 03:27 PM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:
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
Il 15/09/2015 15:03, Drew Wells ha scritto:
On 09/15/2015 11:00 AM, Tonix - Antonio Nati wrote:
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.
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
Your patch instead permit to have null password even if strenght
policy would not allow it.
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
It would make developers more protected against unwanted security bugs.