[INN-COMMITTERS] STABLE-2_4 inn (configure configure
Forrest J. Cavalier III
mibsoft at epix.net
Tue Sep 2 17:58:57 UTC 2003
> both find and fix. And if we're using a buggy version of sendmail, that
> really doesn't matter much, since we're only using it to send mail and our
> demands on it are pretty severely limited.
I believe remote attackers have control over what INN passes to
sendmail, including some control over message headers. Couple this
with sendmail bugs, and someone could own a lot (admittedly
not all...depends on configuration) of Usenet servers, by
posting a newgroup message.
If people are complaining about this, too bad. If sendmail
had a different history, I would agree that this could be
auto-selected. But that is not the world we live in.
I think installers should be required to "pick their own poison." If
they are too stupid to find sendmail, then they shouldn't
be running a Usenet site either.
If a site has policy of "no sendmail" then they should not
have to second-guess what INN does. INN gets installed
by root, and root's path should already be trusted. If
sendmail isn't in there, it is for a reason. INN should not
end-run around it.
And no, I do not think that putting MTA as the first line of
inn.conf is sufficient warning to check it.
But I recognize that there are differences of opinion here.
I am not going to sulk due to this change, but I think it
is a mistake and unnecessary risk. I think it is GOOD
that INN does not always do what other packages do when
More information about the inn-workers