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

Re: Whats chances of getting libTLSv1.3 for stretch



On Mi, 08 iul 20, 09:36:25, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 July 2020 07:54:33 Greg Wooledge wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 05:12:20AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > As a 2 decade user of fetchmail/procmail combo, I just updated to
> > > stretch backports, but did not get a TLSv1.3, so when I configure
> > > the newest fetchmail, I don't get ssl3 support.
> >
> > Er... what?  This question doesn't make any sense.  I can't figure
> > out whether you're asking for a *newer* library or an *older* library
> > than what you have right now.
> >
> > TLS 1.3 is very new, and is not assumed to be present by most
> > applications.
> >
> > SSL 3 is extremely old, and has well-known exploited holes.  My
> > first Google hit for SSL 3 is a refernce to the POODLE exploit from
> > 2014.
> > <https://blog.qualys.com/ssllabs/2014/10/15/ssl-3-is-dead-killed-by-th
> >e-poodle-attack>
> >
> > Are you *really* trying to use SSL 3, because that's what you
> > configured the other end to use, "2 decades" ago?  If so, it is time
> > to stop doing that.  Upgrade *both* ends to use currently supported,
> > non-vulnerable TLS protocols.  At this point, TLS 1.2 is your most
> > likely target.
> 
> ./configure --with-ssl, make, sudo make install, is whats working right 
> now. But I won't know if it all just works again till the middle of the 
> night when sa-train-bayes runs again.  But it runs as me, so nothing is 
> stopping me from running it right now. And this time it did restart 
> fetchmail ok when it was done. 6.4.3 was giving systemd a tummy ache 
> after updating from backports, about 150 packages.  That also destroyed 
> TDE and it took a reboot to restore it, a startx got me xfce.
> 
> But, while fetchmail-6.4.8 seems to be listed by synaptic, its ghosted 
> and will not let me install the "approved" version, so I must dl and 
> build my own.  Whats with that?

Please post the output of 'apt policy fetchmail'.
 
> And I note that procmail is being bad-mouthed, but its been doing 
> exactly what I want for 2 decades with no hiccups.

I remember having a look at its syntax and... well, let's say I used 
maildrop ;)

> I would submit that its docs might need help, but if you read them 
> carefully, it does exactly what you tell it to do, so I've no 
> need/urge to experiment with getmail. 
 
getmail is intended as a replacement for fetchmail...

http://pyropus.ca/software/getmail/faq.html#faq-about-why

As far as I can tell it supports Python 2 only, which is going to be 
removed from Debian.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: