On Fri, 6 Sep 1996, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> just use a secure MTA like qmail. If you take a close look at smap you will
> see that it realy doesnt do very much at all.
Sounds good to me. Sounds exactly like the kind of philosophy that
firewall tools should adhere to.
> It is not very restrictive on
> the addresses and passes a lot of insane data... I dont think it is much
> protection.
I don't agree. It prevents an external user connecting to a process that
has the run of the system, and often with root privaledges. smap is a
nice simple process running without root. It's dumb yes - but that's its
strength. Reads the mail, drops it into a file, and that's all. Sounds
perfect. The address parsing etc can be taken care of later by sendmail,
after smapd has passed the mail onto it.
Dave Roberts | "Surfing the Internet" is a sad term for sad people.
Unix Systems Admin | Get a board, find a beach, surf some REAL waves and
SAA Consultants Ltd | get a *real* life.
Plymouth, U.K. | -=[For PGP Key, send mail with subject of "get pgp"]=-
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
