sysnet@central1.lancaster.ac.uk (Postmaster) (06/06/90)
I'm just installing Berkley sendmail 5.61 on our Sequent Symmetries, using
UK-Sendmail 2.1 to build the configuration.
With mail that is sent by hhsend/mhhcp, I get a strange effect on the
transfer ownership. If I do
/usr/lib/sendmail address
then hhq shows the transfer belonging to daemon. But if I explicitly select
the _same_ configuration file, with
/usr/lib/sendmail -C/usr/lib/sendmail.cf address
hhq shows the transfer as owned by the issuing user. The RFC822 headers
in both messages are identical and correct.
Our old sendmail (Berkely sendmail 4.something) didn't do this!).
Am I doing something stupid? (I don't have a sendmail.fc file anywhere around
that's being used in case 1, and I can't take the option of using sendmail
5.61IDA)
Thanks,
Alan
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| LANCASTER UNIVERSITY POSTMASTER Alan Phillips |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Computer Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YW, UK |
| "A very long way from anywhere...." |
| Phone: 0524-65201 x 3672 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| JANET : postmaster@uk.ac.lancs.cent1 |
| BITNET: postmaster%uk.ac.lancs.cent1@ukacrl |
| UUCP : postmaster%uk.ac.lancs.cent1@ukc |
| ARPA : postmaster%uk.ac.lancs.cent1@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+Andrew.Findlay@brunel.ac.uk (Andrew Findlay) (06/06/90)
| /usr/lib/sendmail address | |then hhq shows the transfer belonging to daemon. But if I explicitly select |the _same_ configuration file, with | | /usr/lib/sendmail -C/usr/lib/sendmail.cf address | |hhq shows the transfer as owned by the issuing user. The RFC822 headers |in both messages are identical and correct. Correct. When you specify a config file of your own, you might be trying to compromise security in some way. Sendmail sets its UID back to match yours. |Our old sendmail (Berkely sendmail 4.something) didn't do this!). Security hole! |that's being used in case 1, and I can't take the option of using sendmail |5.61IDA) Why not? It is backwards-compatible in almost all respects. Andrew -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- | From Andrew Findlay at Brunel University, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, UK | | Andrew.Findlay@brunel.ac.uk phone: +44 895 74000 x2512 | ---------------------------------------------------------------------