From owner-freebsd-security  Sun Nov 17 23:49:06 1996
Return-Path: owner-security
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA20103
          for security-outgoing; Sun, 17 Nov 1996 23:49:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from salsa.gv.ssi1.com (salsa.gv.ssi1.com [146.252.44.194])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA20060
          for <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 17 Nov 1996 23:48:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from gdonl@localhost) by salsa.gv.ssi1.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA14898; Sun, 17 Nov 1996 23:48:23 -0800 (PST)
From: Don Lewis <Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com>
Message-Id: <199611180748.XAA14898@salsa.gv.ssi1.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 23:48:22 -0800
In-Reply-To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert)
       "Re: BoS: Exploit for sendmail smtpd bug (ver. 8.7-8.8.2)." (Nov 18,  7:06am)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.6 alpha(3) 7/19/95)
To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert), freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: BoS: Exploit for sendmail smtpd bug (ver. 8.7-8.8.2).
Sender: owner-security@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Nov 18,  7:06am, Ollivier Robert wrote:
} Subject: Re: BoS: Exploit for sendmail smtpd bug (ver. 8.7-8.8.2).
} According to Don Lewis:
} > Qmail doesn't do all the ESMTP negotiation that sendmail does.  It keeps
} > qmail simpler and less likely to be buggy, but not as functional.  For
} > instance sendmail 8.7.x supports: 8BITMIME, SIZE, DSN, VERB, ONEX, but
} > whatever version of qmail I just checked only supports 8BITMIME and
} > PIPELINING.  Sendmail 8.8.x adds ETRN.
} 
} I don't think it handles 8BITMIME at all even if it announces it. Does it
} support rewriting  from 8bit to 7bit and reverse ?

I think you may be right.  I seem to recall from the discussions on
comp.mail.sendmail that qmail only announces this to keep sendmail from
doing an 8->7 rewrite.  Other than that, qmail just sends 8 bits even
if it is talking to some crusty old mailer that strips of the eighth
bit or just goes bezerk when it receives a message containing characters
with the high bit set.

} > Sendmail's support of UUCP isn't wonderful (mostly a problem of
} > getting DNS totally disabled).  How well does qmail support UUCP?
} 
} That's a common misunderstanding. UUCP support in sendmail is pretty good
} (see my other mail).

I would have been a lot happier in my UUCP email days if sendmail had
supported BSMTP (I think there was a version that did, but it wasn't
the one I was running).

			---  Truck