Xref: utzoo news.admin:3935 news.sysadmin:1280
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.sysadmin
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: A *Big* Thank You
Message-ID: <1988Nov10.165441.25735@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <361@itivax.UUCP> <367@execu.UUCP> <1294@tmpmbx.UUCP> <2517@cs.Buffalo.EDU> <4578@ptsfa.PacBell.COM> <2548@cs.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 16:54:41 GMT

In article <2548@cs.Buffalo.EDU> bowen@sunybcs.UUCP (Devon E Bowen) writes:
>I'm writing this as a public notice that the sendmail daemon is still a
>security hole. If you feel strongly about this, please shut off your sendmail
>daemon. I prefer to run mine so that I can continue to receive mail via the
>Internet.

The latter does not imply the former.  There is at least one implementation
of SMTP that does not require sendmail.  It was, I believe, posted to
comp.sources.misc a little while ago.  It definitely works; although it may
be a bit crude, it's in production on several sites.

The amount of effort that has gone into maintaining sendmail, over the
net as a whole, could have written half a dozen high-quality implementations
of SMTP by now.  It continues to amaze me that people claim there is no
alternative to sendmail.
-- 
Sendmail is a bug,             |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
not a feature.                 | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu