stevens@hsi.UUCP (Richard Stevens) (12/21/88)
Anyone know when and where Version 5.61 of sendmail will
be available ?? It was supposed to be out on Dec. 12.
Richard Stevens
Health Systems International, New Haven, CT
stevens@hsi.uu.net
... { uunet | yale } ! hsi ! stevensbin@primate.wisc.edu (Brain in Neutral) (12/23/88)
From article <226@hsi86.hsi.UUCP>, by stevens@hsi.UUCP (Richard Stevens): > Anyone know when and where Version 5.61 of sendmail will > be available ?? It was supposed to be out on Dec. 12. There is a file ~ftp/4.3/sendmail on ucbarpa.berkeley.edu that says: Sendmail isn't quite ready yet. We're working on it, and it shouldn't be long. Keith Bostic --- I guess they know millions of us are just waiting to deluge their machine with ftp connections :-) Paul DuBois dubois@primate.wisc.edu rhesus!dubois bin@primate.wisc.edu rhesus!bin
tadguy@cs.odu.edu (Tad Guy) (12/23/88)
In article <226@hsi86.hsi.UUCP>, stevens@hsi (Richard Stevens) writes: >Anyone know when and where Version 5.61 of sendmail will >be available ?? It was supposed to be out on Dec. 12. on ucbarpa.berkeley.edu: -r--r--r-- 1 0 1200 108 Dec 12 12:44 4.3/sendmail Which contains: ------ Sendmail isn't quite ready yet. We're working on it, and it shouldn't be long. Keith Bostic 415-642-4948 ------ ...tad -- Tad Guy <tadguy@cs.odu.edu> Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA
paul@devon.UUCP (Paul Sutcliffe Jr.) (01/02/89)
In article <456@rhesus.primate.wisc.edu>, bin@primate.wisc.edu writes: +--------- | From article <226@hsi86.hsi.UUCP>, by stevens@hsi.UUCP (Richard Stevens): | > Anyone know when and where Version 5.61 of sendmail will | > be available ?? It was supposed to be out on Dec. 12. | | There is a file ~ftp/4.3/sendmail on ucbarpa.berkeley.edu that says: | | [ text deleted ] +--------- My assumption from this is that ~ftp/4.3/sendmail is where one would normally ftp the sources from. Will any effort be taken by anyone to make 5.61 available to UUCP-only sites via anon. uucp or e-mail? - paul -- Paul Sutcliffe, Jr. <paul@devon.UUCP> | How many whales do you have to ...!uunet!cbmvax!devon!paul | save to get a toaster?
csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) (01/03/89)
In article <1292@devon.UUCP> paul@devon.UUCP (Paul Sutcliffe Jr.) writes: >My assumption from this is that ~ftp/4.3/sendmail is where one would >normally ftp the sources from. Will any effort be taken by anyone to >make 5.61 available to UUCP-only sites via anon. uucp or e-mail? UUNet always has the latest Berkeley everything available, and I will add sendmail 5.61 to Pyramid's source archive. So UUNet customers and sites connected to pyramid will be able to help themselves. Note that anonymous UUCP is a serious security hole, so very few large sites will mess with it. And sendmail is much larger than anything that should ever be transferred via e-mail. <csg>
honey@mailrus.cc.umich.edu (peter honeyman) (01/03/89)
Carl S. Gutekunst writes: >Note that anonymous UUCP is a serious security hole how so? peter
karl@triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) (01/03/89)
paul@devon.UUCP (Paul Sutcliffe Jr.) writes:
Will any effort be taken by anyone to
make 5.61 available to UUCP-only sites via anon. uucp or e-mail?
It'll show up on osu-cis.
--Karlcsg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) (01/18/89)
Carl S. Gutekunst writes: >Note that anonymous UUCP is a serious security hole Peter Honeyman asks: >how so? Because of the loss of authentication. See the ongoing discussion in news.sysadmin. <csg>
honey@mailrus.cc.umich.edu (peter honeyman) (01/19/89)
bah. there is complete authentication with anonymous uucp -- the caller is authenticated as an anonymous caller. as noted in the other newsgroup, it's easy to restrict access with anonymous uucp: you don't let anyone request any files, you don't send them spooled stuff unless you placed the call. in fact, these are the default permissions in honey danber. it is assumed (by at least one of the uucp troika) that a sys admin who enables anonymous uucp access and sends out spooled files on the basis of a claimed ^PSsysname just doesn't care whether the mail is delivered reliably. (i am one such sys admin, just so you know they exist.) peter