and MX but not between client and the nearest anycast
> > 8.8.8.8.)
>
> Congratulations! You just gave a new definition of security theatre:
> using an unauthenticated channel to distribute trust anchors. You
> can consider libc-musl as unsupported from now on.
Verified on alpine-
Congratulations! You just gave a new definition of security theatre:
using an unauthenticated channel to distribute trust anchors. You
can consider libc-musl as unsupported from now on.
On 19.04.20 13:11, Wietse Venema wrote:
Verified on alpine-3.11.5.
alpine:~/postfix-3.6-20200419$ make makefi
On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 08:02:41PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 19.04.20 13:11, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> >Warning: libc-musl breaks DANE/TLSA security.
> >Use a glibc-based Linux distribution instead.
> >Remove this test to build unsupported Postfix.
> >make: *** [Makefile:79: makefil
On 18 Apr 2020, at 11:04, Rich Felker wrote:
> It's not security theater because nobody's claiming it's secure.
> Rather it's a fairly weak form of hardening that increases the
> required capabilities an attacker needs to exploit a known-insecure
> system.
It is secure in the sense that the commu
On 19 Apr 2020, at 12:16, @lbutlr wrote:
> It is secure
Sorry, I thought this was Opportunistic TLS.
--
I mistook thee for thy better Hamlet Act III scene 4
ew definition of security theatre:
> >> using an unauthenticated channel to distribute trust anchors. You
> >> can consider libc-musl as unsupported from now on.
>
> On 19.04.20 13:11, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >Verified on alpine-3.11.5.
> >
> >alpine:~/postf
