Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 14:34:42 +0500 (KGT) From: CyberPsychotic <mlists@gizmo.kyrnet.kg> To: Gustavo Vieira G C Rios <grios@netshell.vicosa.com.br> Cc: FreeBSD Security <security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: qpopper Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9812261430240.16099-100000@gizmo.kyrnet.kg> In-Reply-To: <3681B710.66AFAD48@netshell.vicosa.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
~ Hi, i am a security paranoid, so i would like to know how secure is ~ qpopper (which is the best: qpopper or cucipop)? ~ How can i use xinetd and qpopper together? several vulneriabilities were found in qpoper implementations: the first, and the most evil one, is a buffer overflow, so consider an upgrade, if you want to use it. another, one, which existed in older ones, allowed an intruder to brute-force passwords without being noticed (and even disconnected in some cases). as for cucipop, I never used it so have no ideas. On most of my Unix systems I use pop3 daemon, which was originally developed for Linux under GNU, but could be ported to BSD easily. (basically path fixes). To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.05.9812261430240.16099-100000>