Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 14:29:22 +0200 From: Gerhard Sittig <Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net> To: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sendmail default run state Message-ID: <20000923142922.F5065@speedy.gsinet> In-Reply-To: <20000923004924.A35072@mithrandr.moria.org>; from nbm@mithrandr.moria.org on Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 12:49:24AM %2B0200 References: <200009222012.e8MKCRF12785@cwsys.cwsent.com> <E13cbSC-000Dyf-00@dialup-janus.css.qmw.ac.uk> <20000923004924.A35072@mithrandr.moria.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 00:49 +0200, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote:
> On Fri 2000-09-22 (23:37), David Pick wrote:
> >
> > [ ... ]
>
> Is there a way to tell sendmail what IP addresses to bind?
Put a wrapper around it. Have per interface instances of inetd
running (there are options for specifying the IP as well as the
conf file). Or wrap your (TCP) services in the ucspi-tcp
package. This will provide you fine grained control over
accessibility, rate limits, memory consumption, env var
controllable features, etc.
> My thinking is that people who start firewalling things are
> quite able to change the option the way they like.
Unless there's a recent(?) development towards the urban legend
that "firewall functionality can be bought". More and more (new)
sysadmins believe in distributors to provide a working firewall
they just have to set two or three variables for - but not more,
since this would stress them more than they could bear. I hope
I'm wrong with this imression, but experience makes me think I'm
not. :(
virtually yours 82D1 9B9C 01DC 4FB4 D7B4 61BE 3F49 4F77 72DE DA76
Gerhard Sittig true | mail -s "get gpg key" Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net
--
If you don't understand or are scared by any of the above
ask your parents or an adult to help you.
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?20000923142922.F5065>