|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: qmail, from bugtraq
From: Bennett Todd (bet
rahul.net)Date: Mon Jan 31 2000 - 11:38:52 CST
- Next message: Christopher Petrilli: "Re: qmail, from bugtraq"
- Previous message: Jason Fesler: "RE: What IMAP Server is recommended for use with Postfix?"
- In reply to: Chip Christian: "qmail, from bugtraq"
- Next in thread: Christopher Petrilli: "Re: qmail, from bugtraq"
- Reply: Bennett Todd: "Re: qmail, from bugtraq"
- Reply: Christopher Petrilli: "Re: qmail, from bugtraq"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
2000-01-31-12:31:31 Chip Christian:
> I like Bernstein's confidence:
So do I.
After the standard set by sendmail, it's an incredible relief having
some truly secure MTAs available.
I think there's no possible question: sendmail may have set the
standard for features, but qmail set the standard for security.
Postfix has pretty well lived up to that security standard, which is
a wonderful achievement. It's made it to the point where I don't
have a qualm in the world about using Postfix as the MTA on a
firewall, the last role in which I continued to specify qmail after
postfix was released. It takes time to build that kind of
confidence, and postfix has established the track record to deserve
it. But let's never forget that qmail defined the category
"high-security MTA".
-Bennett
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Next message: Christopher Petrilli: "Re: qmail, from bugtraq"
- Previous message: Jason Fesler: "RE: What IMAP Server is recommended for use with Postfix?"
- In reply to: Chip Christian: "qmail, from bugtraq"
- Next in thread: Christopher Petrilli: "Re: qmail, from bugtraq"
- Reply: Bennett Todd: "Re: qmail, from bugtraq"
- Reply: Christopher Petrilli: "Re: qmail, from bugtraq"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]