On 11/14/2008 4:28 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: >> I'd be very interested in the response that the postfix author (and >> other vastly more knowledgable people than I, like Victor) would give to >> the people who claim that if it isn't chrooted, it isn't secure. >> >> The only answer I can give right now is 'well, I've heard the author >> Witese enema) on the email support list say that it doesn't really >> provide any more security and isn't worth the headache'.
> That is certainly not what I wrote. I would appreciate it if you > kept your fantasies in check. Well, I was certainly para-phrasing, and no offense was intended, but on what seems like more than a few occasions over the last couple of years (that I've been on the list), when people show up with problems and it turns out to be related to some [often a debian] package that is configured to run chrooted by default, I have seen comments from you like: "Postfix as released by me does not chroot anything. Some Linux distributors insist on setting up things this way, which only can give Postfix a bad reputation." Seeing this many times must have given me the wrong impression, and it certainly isn't the same as '... doesn't really provide any more security...', so my apologies for remembering it wrong. -- Best regards, Charles
