[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others

Adam Aube wrote:
I've added patches for various purposes, but not for security. What security problems were you patching against?

I consider fundimental checks against spam and viruses to be part and parcel to security.

What "idiotic" ideas? qmail is designed to be secure, fast, and simple - and it achieves those goals quite well.

Prime example: Exim logs all activity with a message by a unique identifier assigned to that message. No message passing through Exim will ever have the same identifier. Therefore it is trivial to track down the entire history of a message through any number of logs.

QMail assigns the message's INode as the identifier. INodes are reused. Therefore it is a non-trivial matter to track down what a message has gone through since one has to first find the message number, then track that number until a successful delivery attempt is made. Mind you each delivery attempt is given a different identifier as well and has no reference to original identifier! Once a successful delivery attempt is made all future references to that message *may* be invalid.

That has been a major thorn in my side for weeks because I cannot perform a simple freakin' grep to get the history of a single message! If I did I'd see it pop up several dozen times as the same INode is reused over and over.

Of course logging isn't the only problem with this concept. Try moving the queue. I dare ya!

Simplistic design, yes. Simple, as in to use? No way. *BASIC* operations like logging and queue maintenance required tools to be written.

         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
       PGP Key: 8B6E99C5       | main connection to the switchboard of souls.

Reply to: