On Tue 15.10.13 15:18:06 Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> The server in question is a Microsoft Exchange server with buggy 3DES
> ciphersuites (IIRC found in Windows XP, and perhaps Windows Server 2003).
> 
> Add "exclude=3DES" to the entry table for this server, and you'll likely
> be fine.  You probably don't need to tweak the protocols.

Adding "exclude=3DES" or "exclude=DES-CBC3-SHA" to the smtp_tls_policy_maps 
file didn't quite do it, maybe because I have "smtp_tls_mandatory_ciphers=high" 
set globally. So I used this line, which works for this server:

> [smtp-auth.foo.de]:587 encrypt ciphers=medium

The next problem was the error: "5.7.3 Authentication unsuccessful", which 
appears to be unique for Exchange servers. Google suggested a broken GSSAPI 
implementation on the server side that should be excluded. That leaves only 
LOGIN in this case, which my config doesn't seem to allow for ciphers=medium.

Globally allowing LOGIN with smtp_sasl_mechanism_filter worked, but I didn't 
want that. So I defined a new transport in master.cf:

> exchangerelay unix - - n - - smtp -o smtp_sasl_mechanism_filter=!gssapi,login

and configured postfix to use a sender_dependent_default_transport_maps that 
contains this line:

> michael.bue...@foo.de exchangerelay:

Now, everything works. Phew.

I might still combine the sender_dependent_default_transport_maps with my 
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps so I don't have to maintain both files. Come to 
think of it: Couldn't I combine the single line in smtp_tls_policy_maps into 
the transport definition and save one more file?

> Fortunately, your over-obfuscation of the target server left me with only
> 224 choices of the target IP address.

Thanks for the effort you put in. I wasn't trying to be smart, I just sought to 
avoid angering the admin overlords at foo by publicly discussing their mail 
server.

> I'd like to suggest that you find a less broken email provider.

Nah, I like my employer. And I know for a fact that they keep their particle 
accelerators in much better shape than their mail servers.

Cheers,
Michael

Reply via email to