From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 16 11:06:08 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F64C37B401 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from natto.numachi.com (natto.numachi.com [198.175.254.216]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6023E43FB1 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2003 11:06:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from reichert@numachi.com) Received: (qmail 79398 invoked by uid 1001); 16 Jun 2003 18:06:06 -0000 Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:06:06 -0400 From: Brian Reichert To: Dave Message-ID: <20030616180606.GL41619@numachi.com> References: <20030616105955.U11598@metafocus.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030616105955.U11598@metafocus.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: POP daemon X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:06:08 -0000 On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 11:03:01AM -0700, Dave wrote: > > What would be a good POP daemon to use? I know there are a few in the > mail ports. Are they any good? I use the popd associated with qmail, FWIW. Qmail unto itself has a great track record for reliability and security. > What I mean by good is 'secure as possible' (is there really such thing as > being totally secure / invulnerable?) > > Cheers -- Brian 'you Bastard' Reichert 37 Crystal Ave. #303 Daytime number: (603) 434-6842 Derry NH 03038-1713 USA BSD admin/developer at large