stinga wrote:
> Nothing wrong with this, but there are lighter weight email forwarders
> that can be used. And less code means less bugs.
Richard Thomas wrote:
> Good point. Any recommendations?
"Less code means less bugs" is not the sole factor.
"Mature code means less bugs" is also a major factor too.
I'm not saying Sendmail is bug-free, it's not. It it is old and
mature. While people like to pick on it, root exploits only come around
once every 4-5 years. It's also still very popular on the Internet.
Given that popularity, I wouldn't knock its security record.
Even UNIX, as a typical whole, features far more lines of code than
Windows, but many codebases are far more mature (year-wise). But it
features far fewer holes and _no_ 0 Day exploits.
Although in the case of Windows, that has more to do with politics than
design. E.g., Microsoft will regularly ignore known holes, especially
ones not publicly known, to avoid addressing and admitting to them. I
sure wish they would get rid of that attitude because if someone at
Microsoft knows of it, you can be sure that some BlackHat does as well.
Hence all of the 0 Day exploits we've seen with Windows products.
-- Bryan
P.S. Red Hat now ships Postfix as an alternative, and mnay people like
QMail as well, although its a bit eccentric (but some people prefer it
that way). Debian also includes Exim, which has some nice automation
and integration features.
--
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@... http://thebs.org
CCDA/CCNA CIWSA/MCIWA LPIC2/RHCE MCSA http://thebs.org/certs.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------
** May the naive Windows mob never rule over UNIX common-sense **
|