On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 10:24:14PM +0100, Paolo wrote: > > > priviledged user, as it invokes sendmail with -f. > > Fix sendmail instead, other MTAs do not complain about -f. > > heck ... seems I'm the only one using an MTA pkg in Debian (masqmail) > that's broken on this, and possibly other stuff.
blame myself for having ack'd bug-closing so quickly. No, I think this patch should really make into vacation, and it's not masqmail(8) that's broken, indeed having a default MTA install where normal users are able to set the sender (return-path) is the broken behavior instead (imo), and I prefer masqmail's default. I've checked eg exim4(8) -f implementation and it says it'd check -f against From: and local username: "Allowing untrusted users to change the sender address does not of itself make it possible to send anonymous mail. Exim still checks that the From: header refers to the local user, and if it does not, it adds a Sender: header, though this can be overridden by setting no_local_from_check." that's for exim4; though from a RH-VServer account on a ISP I could send email with: Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] though sendmail(8) there also set: X-Authentication-Warning: oopla set sender to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> using -f but from another account on a Debian/Sarge machine running postfix(8), other ISP, I could send with above from/sender set and no X-* was set. So, enabling -f for normal user by default is *the broken behaviour* IMO, as it allows to spam/spoof too easily. That's gone OT - but it's meant to show that ability to set -f shouldn't be taken as granted and the legit use of -F should instead be among the options (the default, indeed, IMO). BTW my patch would complement patch from #205598 to give full control to user. thanks -- paolo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
