You can easily use TLS with ASMTP, but to be quite honest.
Plaintext is not plaintext
If you read the SASL_README on postfix it explains PLAIN is
base64("\0user\0user\0password");
So Plaintext isnt plaintext. Sorry to inform you that, it also supports
CRAM-MD5 and DIGEST-MD5 just like your IMAP server does.
food for thought
--On Monday, May 20, 2002 9:43 AM -0700 Jeff Bert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> my <1 cent> is that I use plaintext passwords and don't like the idea that
> their password is transmitted whenever they're sending mail. I only use
> POP3S/IMAPS. I messed around with SMTPS but that was back in my totally
> newbie days (now I'm a newbie+) and never got it working so I just moved
> onto the pop-before-smtp idea.
>
> If you could let me in on the workings or SMTPS and SMTP AUTH I'd be
> willing to give it a try again.
>
> Jeff
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott M
>> Likens
>> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 9:19 AM
>> To: Ron Kuris; Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
>> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: What is wrong with ASMTP with SASLv2? (Was Re: FYI:
>> pop-before-smtp works with cyrus-imapd-2.1.4)
>>
>>
>> <10 cents>
>> I'll be honest I had the relay problem, so i just enabled ASMTP with
>> SASLv2, and after figuring out all the options.
>>
>> It works GREAT! All my users can relay without me adding 1
>> single rule for
>> insecurity. I believe most E-Mail Clients that are WYSWIG or GUI Support
>> ASMTP, unfortunatly i'm not sure pine/mutt does so you gotta set
>> your email
>> address right becuause those usually sendmail so it's not an
>> issue as much.
>> But of course you can configure postfix to relay against only 1
>> server and
>> use TLS/ASMTP if you so choose.
>>
>> Point is this, Relaying is a MTA/MUA thing and i see no use to using the
>> extra process when you can use the internal ASMTP in postfix and be
>> happy.
>>
>> I'm also quite aware that the SASLv2 patch works for sendmail.
>>
>> Thanks for my 10cents
>>
>> </10 cents>
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> --On Monday, May 20, 2002 8:51 AM -0700 Ron Kuris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Yes, this is a better solution than my hack, although I wish it weren't
>> > a separate process.
>> >
>> > Ron
>> >
>> > On Sun, 2002-05-19 at 15:56, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 19 May 2002, Amos Gouaux wrote:
>> >> > Precisely why we use DRAC.
>> >> >
>> >> > rk> My recent patch just updates access.db directly. No separate
>> >> > process is rk> required.
>> >> >
>> >> > While a separate process is required for DRAC, the nice thing about
>> >> > it is that it will clear out entries after some configurable amount
>> >> > of time.
>> >>
>> >> And it will work on Murder clusters just as well, which made
>> it suitable
>> >> for default inclusion in Cyrus IMAPd for Debian, too.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
>> >> them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
>> >> where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
>> >> Henrique Holschuh
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> "If Thyne Eyes Deceivee Thee, Pluck Them Out".
>>
>>
>
---
"If Thyne Eyes Deceivee Thee, Pluck Them Out".
