Re: Debian's mail daemons
Marco.Budde@hqsys.antar.com (Marco Budde) wrote on 21.06.97 in <[🔎] 15b_9706212310@antares.antar.com>:
> Am 20.06.97 schrieb kai # khms.westfalen.de ...
>
> Moin Kai!
KH>> I completely fail to understand why a professional system administrator
KH>> would _want_ to use a MTA that's _that_ notorious for security holes. My
KH>> idea of professionalism seriously clashes with this.
> Who tells you that the other MTAs don't have such holes? Because the
> other MTAs are not often used such holes are not discovered.
First of all, I've not yet heard that any other MTA had security holes
deliberately inserted by the author. Happened with sendmail. Lead to the
Internet Worm causing large outages on the net. RFC 1135 describes the
worm incident.
Second, people understand security quite a bit better than when sendmail
was originally written, and this shows.
And lastly, any disadvantage from not being used by as many people has a
parallel advantage in equally less coverage by the "bad guys".
KH>> > And you should remember that the most Linux distributions use sendmail
KH>> > as MTA. In my opinion Debian should use sendmail as standard MTA.
KH>> People, eat shit. Millions of flies can't be wrong.
> sendmail != MS ;-).
True, as far as it goes. It's not any better, though.
MfG Kai
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: