3 ms·
softlimit is not difficult to use, certainly no more difficult than patch. programs like tinydns-conf for example autmatically generate a run script containing
by pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
softlimit is not difficult to use, certainly no more difficult than patch. programs like tinydns-conf for example autmatically generate a run script containing softlimit with a recommended -m setting. maybe qmail needs something similar.
- pwdisswordfish2 6y agoCorrection: With tinydns, it's a -d setting, not an -m setting
- loup-vaillant 6y agoI was talking about patching upstream, okay? It's not like the patch would have to be individually applied to each installation by its own admin. Patch upstream once, and poof, all users worldwide are safe as soon as they update.
- pwdisswordfish2 6y agoPerhaps "Seems much simpler than patching" was an ambiguous statement. I was only referring to the perspective I take as an admin for one user: me. I already use softlimit on a daily basis so it is simpler for me than patching. To me, it seems like a cleaner solution. The two complete mitigations presented were a choice between (a) using softlimit and the -m setting used by qmail's author versus (b) applying a third party patch to fix problems caused by another third party patch (qmail-verify, which was an "upadte" of yet another third party patch) and third party configuration settings (Debian). I thought that was noteworthy.