Looks like Postfix violates this MUST:
> The AUTH command is not permitted during a mail transaction.
> An AUTH command issued during a mail transaction MUST be
> rejected with a 503 reply.
mail from:<>
250 2.1.0 Ok
auth plain XXX
235 2.0.0 Authentication successful
On 10.4.2012, at 19.28, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Timo Sirainen:
>>> I wonder if careful use of the DSN extension would help. With DSN,
>>> the SMTP/LMTP client sends the original recipient with:
>>>
>>> RCPT TO: ORCPT=rfc822;orig-rcpt ...
>>
>
On 9.4.2012, at 16.25, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Timo Sirainen:
>> There's a problem with aliases that LMTP server can't solve. Lets
>> say I have two aliases:
>>
>> info@domain -> shared@domain
>> sales@domain -> shared@domain
>>
>> T
On 9.4.2012, at 6.06, /dev/rob0 wrote:
>> - is there a particular reason why these headers are not already
>> an option via lmtp (aside from nobody asking for or seeing the
>> need previously). Is there an architectural or conceptual reason
>> why these headers should not be added via an lmtp conn
On 4.4.2012, at 10.31, Γεώργιος Δεδούσης wrote:
> Wietse, please comment, don't you think that a public repo, showing each
> source code change would be useful for Postfix? An issue reporting system too?
Issue trackers seem to be kind of a waste of time for projects with few
developers:
a) You
On 27.4.2011, at 18.04, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> I think the POSIX API works in all OSes commonly used nowadays. FreeBSD
>> 5.1, NetBSD 3.0, OpenBSD 4.4, Solaris 5(?), OS X (some version), Linux
>> for last 5+ years.
>> I wrote some wrappers for these and people haven't complained about them
>> muc
On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 07:19 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > It is clear. getpwnam_r() returns 0 both on success and "user not
> > found", you just need to check if the result is NULL or not. If
> > it returns anything else than 0 it's a transient error. If the
> > NSS code internally messes this up
On 27.4.2011, at 0.53, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>> Just wondering: Is it really the nss-ldap code that is buggy or just
>> the libc's getpwnam() call that is fundamentally broken? I recently
>> changed Dovecot to use getpwnam_r() instead, since it allows proper
>> error checking.
>
> Most likely a
On 26.4.2011, at 15.44, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> However, for mail that originates on the mail host, e.g. by mail(1),
>> when an LDAP outage causes local users to disappear (getent passwd
>> username returns no results with exit code 2) local bounces the mail as
>> user unknown. While this is not s
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 12:13 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-04-12 12:03 PM, Simon Waters wrote:
> > Some days I think starting again from scratch with software would be a good
> > idea, then I remember how quickly I can code
>
> Timo (dovecot author) has expressed interest in maybe som
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 11:17 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> I too would have expected a new IMAP extension that would allow the IMAP
> client to ask the IMAP server to post the message. I don't know why this
> route was not taken.
Lemonade group discussed this in their "push vs pull" arguments. I
On 8.3.2010, at 2.22, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Of course I fixed the problem immediately as I found out about
>> it, but I'm just wondering how many other such setups there are
>> that break once IPv6 becomes more common. Should this setting
>> default to "any"? Is there really even a reason for it
On 8.3.2010, at 1.26, Wietse Venema wrote:
> smtp_address_preference (default: ipv6)
Probably the whole reason for this thread was because of me. I used to have a
working IPv6 setup, and then switched to a different ISP and just copied all my
configs. Everything worked fine for a few days so I
On 2.3.2010, at 9.18, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> OK - I'm an idiot. I'll just admit that up front and get it out of the way.
>
> Now that that's settled, what is the difference between "SSL" and "TLS"
> in a MUA - particularly Thunderbird - in a Postfix context?
http://wiki.dovecot.org/SSL tries
On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 17:05 +0100, Frank Bonnet wrote:
> deliver(): Error: file_dotlock_create(/var/mail/)
> failed: Permission denied (euid=3003() egid=3010(smig) missing
> +w perm: /var/mail) (set mail_privileged_group=mail)
>
> Doea this means I have to chmod 777 the
On 13.2.2010, at 0.41, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> No, this is largely irrelevant. What matters is the IMAP performance
> they expect, that IMAP servers are reasonably CPU and memory intensive.
From what I've seen is that IMAP servers normally take less than 1% CPU load
(mainly Dovecot, but I'd thi
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 13:27 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho:
> > Is there an unofficial Postfix VCS repository? I believe there is not an
> > official one, is there a reason for that? I'm asking because I want to
> > keep track of what is going on 2.7 development. Checking the
On Sep 8, 2009, at 6:16 PM, mouss wrote:
- every time I hear "zlib", someting like "vulnerability" hits my
ears.
Well, you inspired me to finally implement a prevention method against
almost all vulnerabilities there could be in zlib: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.2/rev/b359aac78f92
I h
On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 20:53 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Postfix 2.6 will pass the "TLS is active flag". I have changed the
> API so that we no longer need to make code changes in every SASL
> plugin when another attribute is added.
It works with smtps but doesn't work with STARTTLS, because tls_
On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 00:08 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:04:50AM -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> > Oh. That's actually it. Dovecot is listening on private/auth, but Postfix
> > is connecting to private/dovecot. But what is listening on pr
On Apr 26, 2009, at 11:58 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
smtpd_sasl_path = private/dovecot
..
I can see the private/auth socket created when dovecot starts, with
postfix:postfix permissions. Also, netstat shows it:
bash:# netstat -ln | grep dovecot
unix 2 [ ACC ] STREAM LISTENING
On Apr 24, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Juha Pahkala wrote:
Apr 24 15:42:50 server postfix/smtpd[8126]: fatal: no SASL
authentication mechanisms
..
auth default:
mechanisms: plain login
So Dovecot is advertising PLAIN and LOGIN mechanisms to Postfix.
client:
path: /var/spool/postfix/private/a
Mon, 2009-02-23 at 17:11 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Timo Sirainen:
> > On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 16:49 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > > It's basically the same thing as "disable plaintext authentication",
> > > > except on a per-user (or per-doma
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 16:49 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > It's basically the same thing as "disable plaintext authentication",
> > except on a per-user (or per-domain, or per-source-IP-range) basis
> > rather than globally. There are probably some other use cases that I've
> > heard before but ca
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 14:32 -0500, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 02:18:01PM -0500, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> > In some setups it's useful for authentication handling to know if the
> > connection is SSL/TLS secured. The patch below should tell this to
&
In some setups it's useful for authentication handling to know if the
connection is SSL/TLS secured. The patch below should tell this to
Dovecot. It compiles, but other than that I haven't yet tested it.
It anyway looks like sending the SSL/TLS state requires an additional
parameter to xsasl_serve
26 matches
Mail list logo
