Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:49:02 -0700 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu Cc: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Procmail Vulnerabilities check Message-ID: <EC0F9F41-4A57-4A8F-A7B4-67D954182DDA@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <20171210171122.GA48536@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <fb3d23c5-e32d-452a-a0c3-c3cb12340054@cloudzeeland.nl> <a66d1c33-e405-d9e8-d9c3-2738b5e66887@cloudzeeland.nl> <alpine.BSF.2.21.1712080956580.41281@wonkity.com> <20171208180905.GA96560@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <alpine.BSF.2.21.1712091013310.35694@aneurin.horsfall.org> <20171209012522.GA42506@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <alpine.BSF.2.21.1712091451300.35694@aneurin.horsfall.org> <fe88c5e6-155d-dd64-96d5-8f394c41d92f@FreeBSD.org> <20171210171122.GA48536@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 10 Dec, 2017, at 10:11, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> > wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 01:21:13PM +0000, Matthew Seaman wrote: >> Hence the current sendmail in base is neither fish nor fowl: way >> overpowered for almost all installations, but with significant >> limitations for a machine providing a full-blown mail service. >> Personally I agree with his reasoning: unless the primary function of >> your FreeBSD machine is to be an MTA, you really don't need any more >> capability than to either deliver to a local mailbox, or forward all >> e-mails to a smart host. Certainly you don't need anything capable of >> receiving incoming e-mails. > > I disagree. FreeBSd used to pride itself on being a complete operating > system oout-of-the-box. Lately, a smaller number of developers are > moving FreeBSD to being a kernel with a bunch of add-on software. > > dma(1) does not support a .forward file and by extension vacation(1). > Without .forward, then those of use who use procmail(1) (subject of > this email thread) in .forward and by extension spamassisin are > hosed. > > Chapter 27 of the FreeBSD Handbook would need to be rewritten before > sendmail can be removed. It is assumed that sendmail is installed > with base. Hi Steve, I agree with you about the merits of FreeBSD providing a complete system out-of-the-box. But of all the mail servers out there, sendmail is the most archaic and arcane. Sendmail is used primarily by people who are intimately familiar with it over a long history, and simply isn’t a great choice for people getting into mail servers. I’d rather see sendmail installable through ports, and replaced in base with a better solution. Sendmail is too difficult to configure correctly; we should keep it trivial to install (i.e. ports) for those who prefer it, but it shouldn’t be our primary recommendation for users looking for a new MTA. DMA is a phenomenal program and is totally sufficient for a large percentage of our user-base. I wasn’t aware of the lack of .forward support, and I completely agree that that’s a very detrimental omission. # Adam -- Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org http://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EC0F9F41-4A57-4A8F-A7B4-67D954182DDA>