Slashdot Mirror

HFS+ is available Case-sensitive. Check Disk Utility app. Of course, you might encounter some problems with sloppily written third-party apps......

I have two 2-line 20-character VFD displays, like you'd see on top of a pole on the back of a cash register (in fact it used to be part of a cash register.) I was using one of them as a dual timezone clock for a while. http://www.jms1.net/code/#vfdclock has the code, and a picture of the units, if anybody is interested.

No, I don't do Windows. John Simpson has documented a method to do just that, though.

Of course, the only reason that it's slightly more difficult with AD controllers is that AD's data structures are heavily obfuscated. And we all know how well security through obscurity works (as demonstrated by John).

Check out this page for more recent patches.

1 patch. John Simpson has made a combined patch set including some of his own improvements/fixes. he also has alot of other documentation and is quite active on a couple mailing lists related to qmail.

1 patch. John Simpson has made a combined patch set including some of his own improvements/fixes. he also has alot of other documentation and is quite active on a couple mailing lists related to qmail.

Thought of the moment: IIS server's respsonding with, "You are using an Apple Computer. Cancel or Allow?"

Heh. You accuse Microsoft users of a trick that's already rampant amongst Microsoft haters. Try visiting John Simpson's page on resetting an AD password for instance (if you're using IE, you get a very snotty and longwinded rant instead of the url you specified). Or any of the thousands of web pages which detect IE and display a come-on for Firefox, or a link to the (now defunct?) stopie.com

Yet I can't say I've ever seen a site that says Hey, you're using Firefox, you should quit that and get IE! Hmm ...

Like for everything else in qmail, there's a patch..

To reject mail at RCPT TO, I use John Simpson's patch to the validrcptto patch:

http://qmail.jms1.net/patches/validrcptto.cdb.shtm l

That page describes exactly what's wrong with qmail, by the way..

Rejecting at RCPT TO is a completely valid thing to do. Going through all of those hoops to make it happen is offputting for 99% of mail admins. Some of us remember when all UNIX software was like this (autoconf is for wimps!), and it doesn't bother us much. But the vast majority of people who install MTAs these days are not going to make the effort -- by the time they have the knowledge necessary, they already have a preferred MTA that is good enough. ...and that's just for adding one simple feature. Navigating qmail.org to pick out the patches that are of interest to you (from the hundreds of varying quality and duplication and/or conflict) to make your own tarfile for use on your systems is completely out of the question for most people (which makes a lot of sense in many situations, supportability and administrative succession being important after all).

Some of us have the liberty of not worrying about that and/or imposing our will (hopefully informed by acquired and still valid experience) on others. In most other situations, qmail is a hard sell. Which is sad, becuase I think qmail is one of the best examples of how to design qualty software, and I wish more people would use it to learn and teach from. ...and it's also a great MTA.

It occurs to me that qmail is probably the betamax of MTAs. It was a technically solid option, but required a larger initial investment, wasn't spread or marketed effectively, and was eventually made irrelevant by DVDs. Only the purists and iconoclasts hung on despite the overwhelming inertia, and they are best remembered for their disillusioned sputtered claims of superiority. Hmm. Maybe it's time to start reading up on exim.

John Simpson has a combined patch set for qmail. He has a few of his own patches in the mix as well.
i've been running a qmails erver using his patch for almost a year and i love it.

I could also break into the system by using a boot floppy or CD.

I could then reset the domain servers's root password.

Or I could simply pull out the hard drive and take it home.

Controlling physical access is an important and often neglected part of computer security.

Actually, the problem is that without any extra patches, qmail does NOT refuse mail for unknown recipients. It only checks the recipient's domain name before deciding whether or not to accept a message- which means that if somebody sends a message to a non-existent mailbox, as long as the domain is handled by that server, qmail will accept it during the SMTP conversation, and then bounce it after the mailbox is found not to exist.

There are several patches out there which teach the SMTP server to check for the existence of a given recipient at the "userid" level rather than just the domain name. The problem is that most of these methods are slow or they only work with one specific method of organizing mailboxes (i.e. they only work if the userid's are system accounts, or if you are using vpopmail to manage your virtual domains.)

The most flexible patch I found was one which used a text file full of email addresses to tell what was valid- I ended up making that patch use a cdb file instead of a flat text file, so it will scale for large ISP's. Of course it needs an external process to generate the cdb file, but for most systems that's not an issue- cron jobs are easy to write.

http://www.jms1.net/qmail/patches/ has my modified patch, both as a stand-alone patch, and as part of a larger combined patch that I use for my own server and my clients' servers.

The author of the web page is correct in that qmail has problems, although I think he shold add a note to his blanket condemnation of qmail which says "unless patched appropriately."

I like his idea of building an automatic blacklist of IP addresses which send messages which are rejected by clamav... I'm going to have to look into doing that myself.

My own web site does it... www.jms1.net... or for those not using IE, www.jms1.net/ie.html is what the IE people are seeing. (And before every moron on the planet decides to tell me this at the same time, I already know you can use google's cache to view the site.)

Surely I'm not the only person out there who excludes IE from accessing their web site?

(Self-slashdotting... is that like suicide?)

My own web site does it... www.jms1.net... or for those not using IE, www.jms1.net/ie.html is what the IE people are seeing. (And before every moron on the planet decides to tell me this at the same time, I already know you can use google's cache to view the site.)

Surely I'm not the only person out there who excludes IE from accessing their web site?

(Self-slashdotting... is that like suicide?)

http://www.jms1.net/ie.html
- or -
http://www.jms1.net/{anything else} if you're running IE.

http://www.jms1.net/ie.html
- or -
http://www.jms1.net/{anything else} if you're running IE.

Recent Dell systems come with MusicMatch pre-installed. I would consider that spyware, and others would agree.

= 9J =