Re: emacs, Gnus, sendmail ?

[Tim X]

Dick Hoogendijk <dick@nagual.nl> writes:

> Tim X <timx@nospam.dev.null> writes:
>
>> However, few people run sendmail anymore and unless you need to,
>> don't! There are many other MTAs out there.
>
> I think your story in general is a very good one. I saved it for
> future reference ;-) However, don't start a MTA war by saying using
> sendmail is 'not done' It's OK to use the MTA you like, but sendmail
> is as good as any other. There's nothing wrong with using it.
> I know lots of linux distros have abandoned it, but FreeBSD and
> solaris -to name a few- still have it as their default MTA.
>
Actually I didn't mean to imply that sendmail wasn't any good. In fact, its
still my favorite MTA - its the one I feel I understand best. However, unless
you have pretty demanding requirements, I don't think most people require its
power and flexibility - all of which comes at a cost, which is generally
additional learning at a level that exceeds what many users require. 

I've actually had a number of arguments with people who incorrectly believe
that sendmail is insecure and/or old/out of date. Often, this is with people
who recommend qmail, an MTA which I have had to administer and never felt
comfortable with because I never felt I really understood how all the bits
worked/integrated. Sendmail was a program, which although potentially complex,
has a model I find easy to understand and once you know about m4, is as easy to
setup as any other MTA I've had to configure. The security criticisms of
sendmail, I bleieve are out of date and misleading. If anything, sendmail is
one of the most secure simply because it is so widely used and has been
'tested' so thoroughly. People forget that the security holes found in sendmail
occured at a time when security of such protocols was just beginning to become
an issue and overlook the fact that the initial system was devleoped back when
security was not the issue it is now (the good old days when you could trust
the majority of users to do the right thing!). The point is that havinig to
address those issues combined with the number of sites using it and its obvious
appeal to those wanting to circumvent security means that it probably is more
secure than less used systems that really haven't had their security
challenged. 

The main point I wanted to make in my original post was that in many cases, you
simply don't need to bother with a local MTA - use your ISPs and let them take
care of the admin or use a more light weight MTA, such as exim etc. There is
far too much really interesting things out there to get bogged down managing a
mail server if you don't need to. 

tim

> -- 
-- 
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au