Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:19:14 -0400
From:  "Greg Shaffer" <shaffer.greg (at mark) gmail.com>
Subject:  [coba-e:10899] Re: Auth SMTP problem using CRAM-MD5
To:  coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org
Message-Id:  <c0d82ef30710151419l39c21ed9heeee1f178757b2a8 (at mark) mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:  <c0d82ef30710091701l539c8a10l8b2edd1f5fdb5678 (at mark) mail.gmail.com>
References:  <c0d82ef30710091701l539c8a10l8b2edd1f5fdb5678 (at mark) mail.gmail.com>
X-Mail-Count: 10899

Since I didn't get any responses to this question, I tried option 2
and it seems fine.  I am sure it won't take me long to figure out what
happened if a future update re-writes sendmail.mc.

Although I have side-stepped my immediate issue, I would like to know
the sasauthd database is used for anything in BQ.  I suspect this may
just be a rough edge in the Nuonce package of SMTP authentication for
Sendmail.

Greg


On 10/9/07, Greg Shaffer <shaffer.greg (at mark) gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello -
>
> I am trying to set up my server to for my users to send mail via  AUTH
> SMTP over SSL.  Outlook and Thunderbird work fine, but Pegasus Mail
> (which is widely used here) does not.  As I understand it, because the
> server is advertising CRAM-MD5,  Pegasus uses it instead of the login
> method and there is no provision to prevent it from doing so (I
> checked).  However, because there are no sasldb entries, those
> Pegasus clients cannot successfully authenticate.  I am trying to
> figure out some way to correct this issue short of manually creating &
> maintaining sasldb entries for each user.
>
> Here are the solutions I am considering:
>
> (1) Automate additions to sasldb.  I haven't seen anything that
> clearly suggests that this is possible.
>
> (2) Reconfigure sendmail so it does not advertise CRAM-MD5 (if
> possible).  Is there any point in using it with an SSL connection?
> Apparently Outlook and Thunderbird either aren't trying to use it at
> all or they are falling back to something else (e.g. LOGIN).
>
> (3) Somewhere I saw something about configuring saslauthd to
> authenticate against pam, but I am not entirely sure what the security
> ramifications of this might be.
>
> I am also concerned that an update might cause options 2 & 3 to
> suddenly break. I suspect that is less likely with option 2, but I
> have no idea about option 3.
>
> I would appreciate any thoughts anyone might have on these or other
> possible options.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Greg
>


-- 
Greg Shaffer