Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: FWTK and smap/smapd
From: Rick Murphy <rmurphy () mitretek org>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 13:22:43 -0400
At 08:20 AM 7/17/2002 -0700, Roger Marquis wrote:
The drawback to smap's anti-relay and anti-spam features is that they are limited.
In what way are they limited?
That and the fact that the code has such a small user-base, few contributors, no discussion list, and is not being actively maintained.
I can't determine the user-base size, and will agree that the contributor list is small. That's driven more by the license than anything else, I suspect. There is a discussion list (yes, it's not specific to smap). I'm not sure what you mean by "not being actively maintained" - I'll assume you don't intend that as an insult :-) (I will agree that fwtk isn't being actively developed by anyone. It is, however being actively supported.)
Patches in particular are subject to little or no code review.
No argument. Actually, all of fwtk badly needs a review. Too bad it's not open-source - we'd potentially have a much larger developer base. (It couldn't get much smaller.)
Postfix's smtpd is essentially smap on steroids. All the security advantages plus several additional features (whitelists, header checks, message size limits, various rate limits, recipient checks, ...). See the mailing list and smtpd man page for details.
Other than rate limits, smap can do all the above - whitelisting, sender/recipient/domain-based denies, DNSBL support (either marking incoming messages with a warning header or denying them), etc. Even with that, smap doesn't compete because postfix has one unbeatable advantage - it's being actively developed and is widely used.
>The spam-rejection capabilities are pretty broad - >there's things I can do to block spam with smap that qmail and postfix >can't do. Smap does something that Postifx doesn't? What would that be?
Answered earlier. -Rick _______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd, (continued)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Paul Robertson (Jul 16)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Marcus J. Ranum (Jul 16)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd ark (Jul 16)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd ark (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Frederick M Avolio (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Paul Robertson (Jul 17)
- Message not available
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Marcus J. Ranum (Jul 18)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Frederick M Avolio (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Roger Marquis (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Joseph S D Yao (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Bennett Todd (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Rick Murphy (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Joseph S D Yao (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Roger Marquis (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Brian Hatch (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Dominik Miklaszewski (Jul 17)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Devdas Bhagat (Jul 18)
- Re: FWTK and smap/smapd Greg Polanski (Jul 18)
- RE: FWTK and smap/smapd Karl Vogel (Jul 18)