Mailing List Archive: Qmail: users

qmail in the public domain?

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

matthew at dempsky

Nov 3, 2007, 9:26 PM

Post #1 of 6 (1473 views)
Permalink

qmail in the public domain?

There's a thread discussing Dan's ``Some thoughts on security after
ten years of qmail 1.0'' paper, but I haven't seen any mention on the
slides to the corresponding talk[1]. Namely, page 10 says:

2007.11: $500 -> $1000;
qmail placed into public domain.

Does this mean what I think it does? :-)

[1] http://cr.yp.to/talks/2007.11.02/slides.pdf

hanche at math

Nov 4, 2007, 1:09 AM

Post #2 of 6 (1408 views)
Permalink

Re: qmail in the public domain? [In reply to]

+ "Matthew Dempsky" <matthew[at]dempsky.org>:

> There's a thread discussing Dan's ``Some thoughts on security after
> ten years of qmail 1.0'' paper, but I haven't seen any mention on the
> slides to the corresponding talk[1]. Namely, page 10 says:
>
> 2007.11: $500 -> $1000;
> qmail placed into public domain.
>
> Does this mean what I think it does? :-)
>
> [1] http://cr.yp.to/talks/2007.11.02/slides.pdf

Well, he probably didn't put it there by mistake. But the month isn't
over yet, and he hasn't changed http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html yet,

- Harald

nelson at crynwr

Nov 4, 2007, 5:02 PM

Post #3 of 6 (1389 views)
Permalink

Re: qmail in the public domain? [In reply to]

Matthew Dempsky writes:
> There's a thread discussing Dan's ``Some thoughts on security after
> ten years of qmail 1.0'' paper, but I haven't seen any mention on the
> slides to the corresponding talk[1]. Namely, page 10 says:
>
> 2007.11: $500 -> $1000;
> qmail placed into public domain.
>
> Does this mean what I think it does? :-)

Yes. So ... should we rename netqmail-1.05 to qmail-1.06 and include
SMTP-AUTH and TLS in it?

--
--my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com | People have strong opinions
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | about economics even though
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 | they've never studied it.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog | Curious how that is!

qmail at jfoo

Nov 4, 2007, 5:46 PM

Post #4 of 6 (1384 views)
Permalink

Re: qmail in the public domain? [In reply to]

On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 20:02:04 -0500
Russ Nelson <nelson[at]crynwr.com> wrote:

> Yes. So ... should we rename netqmail-1.05 to qmail-1.06 and include
> SMTP-AUTH and TLS in it?

Yes to the SMTP-AUTH/TLS. No to the renaming. If qmail is in the public domain,
anyone can release a qmail-1.06. netqmail already has brand recognition.

j

Jason.Haar at trimble

Nov 4, 2007, 8:21 PM

Post #5 of 6 (1388 views)
Permalink

Re: qmail in the public domain? [In reply to]

John Gateley wrote:
> Yes to the SMTP-AUTH/TLS. No to the renaming. If qmail is in the public domain,
> anyone can release a qmail-1.06. netqmail already has brand recognition.
>
>
I agree - netqmail-1.06 with TLS (with client certs support for both
qmail-smtpd and qmail-remote), and SMTP-AUTH (including qmail-remote),
and recipient checking (no-one should be running an edge SMTP server
without that these days [sorry Dan - that's the truth!]).

Also, was RFC-2821 support (i.e. making qmail try other MX records on
4XX status) ever made part of netqmail?

Hmmm, starting to sound like a wish list, MUST... RESIST!!!...

--
Cheers

Jason Haar
Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd.
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1

nelson at crynwr

Nov 5, 2007, 8:46 PM

Post #6 of 6 (1350 views)
Permalink

Re: qmail in the public domain? [In reply to]

Jason Haar writes:
> I agree - netqmail-1.06 with TLS (with client certs support for both
> qmail-smtpd and qmail-remote), and SMTP-AUTH (including qmail-remote),
> and recipient checking (no-one should be running an edge SMTP server
> without that these days [sorry Dan - that's the truth!]).

Yes, JohnL asked for that, too. And others have pointed out that
netqmail should persist.

> Also, was RFC-2821 support (i.e. making qmail try other MX records on
> 4XX status) ever made part of netqmail?

No.

--
--my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com | People have strong opinions
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | about economics even though
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 | they've never studied it.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog | Curious how that is!

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact lists@gossamer-threads.com