Security-Fix Sendmail 8.12.9 Released
bahamutirc writes "Yet another security problem was discovered by Michal Zalewski in Sendmail 8.12.8, 'a buffer overflow in address parsing due to
a char to int conversion problem which is potentially
remotely exploitable.' Apparently somebody jumped the gun and posted before Sendmail had a chance to notify anyone, so they had to release it today. Go grab your source." Here's the CERT advisory.
Sendmail: The IIS of Open Source.
This is the straw that breaks the camel's back. I'm changing to another MTA.
NO CARRIER
I fought with the M4 format of sendmail.cfg for a while in setting up a complex system before switching to qmail. Ive tried postfix too, but I still see diehard sendmailers around.
For one, sendmail is really not intuitive. If youre given a server youve never seen before and have to alter some fancy configs in it, could you do it faster than if it were say qmail? Maybe if I stare at M4 pinfo I could begin to get it, I gave up early there.
Secondly these security problems.
So beside the fact that sendmail is the standard, quite mature and very flexible if you know how to config it, does it have any big edge over postfix or qmail that everyone should know about?
And can the sendmail developers be brave trailblazers and finally change the config file syntax to just text words like httpd.conf?
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
This one bug doesn't make sendmail bad. The fact that it's had scores of bugs does.
It's "only" a mail server, but what about a company whose email contains very sensitive information? They may feel safe using, say, smtps and imaps, but if sendmail isn't secure, they're sunk. In addition, getting on a mail server may allow access to a local network filled with insecure windows boxes. Oops.
You seem to be way too attached to sendmail. There are better alternatives available, so why not use them? I broke off from sendmail years ago, happily.
You should not create such an attachment to software; I use OpenSSH currently because it's free and works. I won't pretend it's not bug-ridden, though, and if something better comes along, I will switch because I care about security. I don't care if I've been using OpenSSH for years.
Well, the Full-Disclosure list that I am involved with was one of the ones that received the premature announcement, but I'm sure you'll agree that even with the follow-up it was far from anything that provided a remote exploit. The tone of the thread seemed to indicate that there was already interest in this 'in the wild' before it was disclosed to the lists in question, in any case. Kudos to the Sendmail team for getting the fix out so promptly.
It looks to me like OSX 10.2.4 is vulnerable to this exploit. The CERT advisory says all version previous to 8.12.9 and I'm pretty sure OSX uses 10.12.6. Can anyone confirm this? It is disabled by default, so it is not large issue. Anyone care to bet as to how long for a security patch?
Please keep in mind that this MTA was around when the network was more of a community (not a lot of .com) and having an open relay was normal.
But that is the major PROBLEM with sendmail. Or, do you mean we should continue to use a program with a bad design for today's world _because_ it has a bad design?
Interesting how we just had this article the other day.
I know some places process alot of mail with sendmail and need all the speed they can get, but the monster sites seem to have gone to qmail anyway. Considering the speed of my computer vs. the speed of my 'net pipe, I don't have much of a load on my mailserver, which leads me to ask:
Does anybody know of a good mailserver written in a higher-level language?
This is what, the 82nd remote root-exploit in sendmail due to C coding problems? Let's see something written in Perl or Python or Java, even.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)