Re: Identifying used patches

Erwin Hoffmann <[email protected]> Sat, 26 Mar 2016 12:34:09 +0100
Newsgroups	gmane.mail.qmail.general
Message-ID	<[email protected]>
Hi Jens,

you may have a look at my qmail follow-up s/qmail (http://fehcom.de/sqmail.html).

It does the trick as well (among others).

regards.
--eh.


> Am 26.03.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Jens Bauer <[email protected]>:
> 
> Hi Ed.
> 
> Thank you for the quick answer and suggestions.
> 
> Note: I am already running qmail; I still have the binaries running, but I need to make it work with debian.org.
> I do not have the recipe for re-building the exact same version of qmail that I have currently running.
> 
> Can you confirm that John's patch is the *only* patch supporting DENY_TLS and ALLOW_INSECURE_AUTH and REQUIRE_AUTH ?
> 
> If 7.10 is the one I already have installed, then it will not help me installing it again, because it already has the ANY-to-CNAME patch.
> -So if that's what I have installed already, then the problem is elsewhere.
> 
> Anyone wanting to test if their qmail works with debian.org and lists.debian.org could try writing a small test e-mail to the debian-user list-bot:
> 
> To: List Bot <[email protected]>
> Subject: Hello
> Nice weather. I'm just testing my MTA.
> 
> (I get a response if I send the message via telnet, but if I send it through qmail-smtpd, it never leaves my server).
> If noone can get a reply from the above mentioned list-bot, I think we might have a bug to find and fix.
> 
> 
> Love
> Jens
> 
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2016 08:52:07 +0000, ed wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 03:26:57AM +0100, Jens Bauer wrote:
>>> "SMTP Protocol Error: 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of
>>> allowed rcpthosts; no valid cert for gatewaying (#5.7.1)"
>> 
>>> I am denying any authorization/authentication on port 25.
>>> I require secure authorization/authentication on port 587.
>> 
>>> My actual question is:
>>> Which patch(es) use "ALLOW_INSECURE_AUTH", "DENY_TLS" and "REQUIRE_AUTH" ?
>>> 
>>> Normally, I would only apply a minimum set of patches, which means
>>> I'm not likely to use a "combined patch".
>>> Is it *only* the patches from John M. Simpson, or are there others too ?
>>> -A lot of arrows point in that direction, which means that I might
>>> have stopped rolling my own recipe and used John's patches with my
>>> own RCPTCHECK added (I would expect that John's patch would include
>>> the "ANY DNS" patch, though).
>> 
>> From what you've said above, I would suggest you get the latest (7.10)
>> combined patch[1] and install from his instructions using the various
>> run scripts[2].
>> 
>>  1: <https://qmail.jms1.net/patches/combined-details.shtml>
>>  2: <https://qmail.jms1.net/scripts/>
>> 
>> Surprisingly (or not so) that combined set has served me well. The only
>> change I've added is some TLS options to prevent SSL2[3].
>> 
>>  3: <https://www.usenix.org.uk/content/qmail.html>
>> 
>> Using John's patches will at least get you a good stable system with
>> minimal effort.
>> 
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Ed http://www.s5h.net/
>> 
> 
Dr. Erwin Hoffmann | FEHCom | http://www.fehcom.de | PGP Key-Id: EE00CF65
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 842 B)