Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ub4b!kulcs!kulesat!esat.kuleuven.ac.be!elsen
From: elsen@esat.kuleuven.ac.be
Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix
Subject: Re: Update on Sendmail problems
Message-ID: <1990Nov10.175506.3975@esat.kuleuven.ac.be>
Date: 10 Nov 90 17:55:06 GMT
References: <9010192109.AA01121@polymer.che.clarkson.edu> <1990Nov2.145406.1449@hollie.rdg.dec.com> <1990Nov7.140131.2909@hollie.rdg.dec.com>
Organization: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven,ESAT - dep. Elect. Engineering, Belgium
Lines: 39

In article <1990Nov7.140131.2909@hollie.rdg.dec.com>, jch@dyfed.rdg.dec.com (John Haxby) writes:
> 
> In article <1990Nov2.145406.1449@hollie.rdg.dec.com>, jch@dyfed.rdg.dec.com (John Haxby) writes:
> |> 
> |> The ULTRIX V4.0 sendmail includes a fix for a rather interesting
> |> security hole that, among other things, involves changing the
> |> definition of the local mailer.  This is important.  If you don't
> |> make the change, then all mail appears to come from daemon, which
> |> is what you are seeing.  I don't believe that the sun version of
> |> sendmail that you are running includes the fix so it isn't
> |> surprising that the config file works for the sun machine but
> |> not for the dec machine.
> 
> This is a the solution to a problem that isn't the topic of
> discussion, sorry.

  Excuse me gentlemen but let's return to a more basis issue here :

  Does this mean that it is advisable NOT to take one's SENDMAIL 
  source from Ultrix V3.n when upgrading to V4.0 ?

  Should one instead take DEC's skeleton sendmail.cf file from
  V4 distribution and reinsert 'site specific' rewrite rules ?

  What's the comment of the net on this , did you follow this path ?
  Is it documented somewhere that that's the way to go ?

-- 


  Marc Elsen (System Manager/Software Engineer)
  Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
  Dep. E.S.A.T.
  Kard. Mercierlaan 94
  3030 HEVERLEE
  Belgium
              tel. 32(0)16220931(ext. 1080)

               EMAIL : elsen@esat.kuleuven.ac.be