From owner-cvs-all Tue Jan 26 11:59:15 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA22125 for cvs-all-outgoing; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 11:59:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gratis.grondar.za (gratis.grondar.za [196.7.18.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA22120; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 11:59:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Received: from greenpeace.grondar.za (greenpeace.grondar.za [196.7.18.132]) by gratis.grondar.za (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id VAA73292; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:59:03 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Received: from grondar.za (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by greenpeace.grondar.za (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id VAA50856; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:59:02 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Message-Id: <199901261959.VAA50856@greenpeace.grondar.za> To: Matthew Dillon cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , Andreas Klemm , Nate Williams , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Small, useful tools (Was: Re: 'cpdup' program, and question) In-Reply-To: Your message of " Tue, 26 Jan 1999 11:43:35 PST." <199901261943.LAA20994@apollo.backplane.com> References: <27224.917376396@critter.freebsd.dk> <199901261912.VAA50572@greenpeace.grondar.za> <199901261922.LAA20798@apollo.backplane.com> <199901261933.VAA50713@greenpeace.grondar.za> <199901261943.LAA20994@apollo.backplane.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:59:01 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Matthew Dillon wrote: > :What do you mean by that? If the OOB sendmail is linked against libwrap > :but the default config files cause sendmail to behave exactly as it > :does without wrappers, is that OK? Or do you object to it being linked > :against libwrap in the first place? > > libwrap is ok, at least to a point. Agreed. Wrappers are not a panacea, just useful. > I've seen people throw in the kitchen sink using tcp wrappers and > create more problems for their systems then they've solved. It is > fairly easy, for example, to attack a system running tcp wrappers > which does reverse-ident authentication. I don't mind something like > sendmail doing it - I think that's a good feature, but some people > just go completely bonkers with tcp wrappers. Sure - like with anything. I propose that the initial configs be conservative (and educational in the comments). After that, if the luser screws it up, he's on his own. M -- Mark Murray Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message