Rich Kulawiec via plug on 7 Sep 2019 01:03:59 -0700 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [PLUG] Exim oops (vs Postfix?) |
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 04:57:55PM -0400, JP Vossen via plug wrote: > On 9/6/19 2:51 PM, Rich Kulawiec via plug wrote: > > > >1. There are use cases for postfix -- and for sendmail, exim, and courier. > > I'd agree with everything but sendmail, and there are other valid choices. > Sendmail used to be abysmal for both security and configuration. That's ancient history. *Everything* was abysmal for both security and configuration. (See, for example, "rlogin" et.al.) (There was also a concerted sendmail-bashing effort on Usenet a couple of decades ago, driven by someone who wrote a competing but dysfunctional MTA, some of whose lingering after-effects are still with us.) > If the m4 config thing made sense 30+ years ago, it doesn't anymore for > KISS reasons if nothing else. Have you configured sendmail lately? It's not nearly as necessary to be m4-proficient as it once was. Oh, it certainly helps, and anyone who's serious about being a system admin should know m4 (like awk and make and sed and other fundamental tools) but it's quite possible to construct production-quality sendmail configurations without it. > You can argue a > "significant investment in a complicated config" but I'll say it would > be more secure, more maintainable, more extensible and better for you > and the internet to bite the bullet and migrate to Postfix. There are reasons to use different MTAs in different places, and I *am* running postfix in the places where it makes sense to do so, having bitten that bullet a very long time ago. (As I sometimes point out, this it not my first day on the job.) But I'm also running sendmail and courier in other places -- no exim at the moment, except in a test environment. None of them are issue-free, thanks to the persistence and ingenuity of attackers. ;) What would be better for the Internet would be for people running any of these MTAs to read RFC 2142, implement it, and *pay attention* to what they receive as a result so that when problems occur, as they inevitably will, there's a viable mechanism for telling them. Unfortunately, this is not the case, even at some allegedly competent allegedly professional operations; see, for example, this recent discussion: really amazon? https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2019-July/102277.html ---rsk ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug