OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
From: mlasoftlogic.de
Date: Fri Oct 26 2001 - 03:41:32 CDT

  • Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

    Yes, the patch Q303451 causes this POP3 authentication issue. I never
    had it before. There is a KB article explaining the problem:
    http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q296/3/87.ASP.

    You might also find the following article helpful for POP3 communication
    testing via telnet:
    http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q165/1/86.ASP

    Hope this helps.
    Thilo

    -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
    Von: Robert Gosewehr [mailto:robert.gosewehrlmiv.com]
    Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. Oktober 2001 08:30
    An: focus-mssecurityfocus.com
    Betreff: POP3 and IMAP authentication after Q303451

    It appears that applying patch Q303451 for Exchange 2000 changes the
    authentication methods for POP3 and IMAP. This only happens when the
    user logon name for the domain is different from the mailbox alias. If
    the two are different there is a new convention for specifying a
    username when using POP3 or IMAP to authenticate. The following is taken
    from an email from a Microsoft support tech.

    -------
    ISSUE: POP3 and IMAP services would not authenticate.

    RESOLUTION: We found that the reason POP3 authentication was failing was
    because you have different logon and mailbox alias. This is most likely
    due to the fact that the hotfix added a check before allowing POP3
    authentication.

    We solved this by changing the way you log on. By using the following
    format we were able to successfully logon via POP3:
    <DomainName>\<LogonName>\<MailboxAlias>.
    -------

    I couldn't find any links for more information on this issue. I didn't
    even know this "check" before the POP3 authentication existed. Does
    anyone have any links or further information?

    thanks.
    robert