Subject: Re: qmail or postfix ??
From: Christopher E. Brown (cbrown@woods.net)
Date: Tue Apr 29 2003 - 22:54:29 AKDT
Having been around sendmail, qmail, smail, zmailer, and postfix since
it was still vmailer, I am a very definite postfix person.
Qmail is another multipart mailer, and is a very flexible system, even
these days it can do almost anything (function wise) Postfix can
(Postfix development has gotten a bit ahead of Qmail).
As to why I do not use Qmail, and will not use or recommend Qmail, I
could very easily rant for several hours (I know at least a few around
here have heard me on this subject).
However, this is generally a good way to start a religious war...
I will say that my reasons have nothing to do with the functionality
or performance or Qmail, and that I feel Qmail would be better than
sendmail for most systems. However I would never use it when Postfix
was available.
Anyone looking at Qmail for a mission critical system might want to
take a close look at how Bernstein has handled development over the
years and how he relates to folks even suggesting a security issues
related to (let alone even suggesting with) Qmail. A very close look
at his security challenge, and how he defines what secure as it
relates to Qmail would be in order as well.
To give a common example from crypto, the statement
"There are no known attacks, other than brute force, against a good
One Time Pad cipher system, and the use of suitable length PADs makes
these attacks useless in the real world."
is perfectly true.
Defining "suitable length", and a secure method of exchange for the
One Time PADs is not within the scope of the statement, making
the statement perfectly true, and perfectly meaningless in many cases.
-- I route, therefore you are.--------- To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org> with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Tue Apr 29 2003 - 22:52:52 AKDT