RE: SASL vs. M$ Outlook and Outlook Express

From: Tom Kovar (no email)
Date: Mon Jan 01 2007 - 13:06:03 EST

  • Next message: Magnus Bäck: "Re: header_checks or maildrop?"

    Yeah, Magnus, very much right. But not only that: LOGIN apparently has
    to be the **FIRST** method proposed by the server - if not, M$ does
    neither find nor recognise it.

    Tack så mycket,
            --- Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From:
    [mailto:] On Behalf Of Magnus Bäck
    Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 7:00 PM
    To:
    Subject: Re: SASL vs. M$ Outlook and Outlook Express

    On Monday, January 01, 2007 at 14:32 CET,
         Rene van Hoek <> wrote:

    > I did an telnet to your machine and that seems ok:
    >
    > Leto:/Volumes renevanhoek$ telnet mail.kovarovi.org 25
    > Trying 194.212.102.169...
    > Connected to bimbo.kovarovi.org.
    > Escape character is '^]'.
    > 220 mail.kovarovi.org ESMTP Postfix
    > EHLO test.a8.nl
    > 250-mail.kovarovi.org
    > 250-PIPELINING
    > 250-SIZE 10240000
    > 250-VRFY
    > 250-ETRN
    > 250-AUTH PLAIN
    > 250-AUTH=PLAIN
    > 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
    > 250-8BITMIME
    > 250 DSN

    No, that's not okay. The Microsoft-style LOGIN mechanism is missing.
    More recent Microsoft clients may support the PLAIN mechansim as well,
    but since people may be running older software I'd say it's a
    requirement to provide both PLAIN and LOGIN.

    While the OP is fixing LOGIN, I suggest he fixes support for CRAM-MD5
    and DIGEST-MD5 as well so that clients won't be forced to send passwords
    in the clear.

    [...]

    -- 
    Magnus Bäck
    

  • Next message: Magnus Bäck: "Re: header_checks or maildrop?"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD