Re: small secure POP3 servers?

From: Ashok Aiyar (aiyar@ebv.mimnet.northwestern.edu)
Date: 12/29/01 

From: Ashok Aiyar <aiyar@ebv.mimnet.northwestern.edu>
Date: 29 Dec 2001 19:17:59 GMT

On Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:55:05 GMT,
    Rob MacGregor (me@privacy.net) wrote:
> John Woodstock wrote:
>
>> I think there is a security problem with that port..
>
> Details? While there is one known exploit against 2000a to 2000c there aren't
> any published ones for 2001 or the 4.x series (other than sub version 12.264)
> that I can find.
>
> Random "I think" without detail doesn't help anybody...

I concur completely. Earlier in this thread someone implied that
Qualcomm's version of popper (qpopper) was currently full of security-flaws.
Again, there is no evidence that any version of Qpopper released for the
last *two* years can be exploited.

Spreading FUD isn't helpful. Providing concrete examples that document
vulnerabilities in current versions of any package is worthwhile for
both developers and users.

Later,
Ashok 

-- 
Ashok Aiyar
RLU #51601

Relevant Pages

  • Re: small secure POP3 servers?
    ... Apologize for the posting.. ... > I think there is a security problem with that port.. ...
    (comp.security.unix)
  • Re: Azureus open ports - security problem?
    ... It's a potential security problem, but only while Azureus *is* in use. ... An open firewall port is only a problem if something is ... listening on it, and has exploitable flaws. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: small secure POP3 servers?
    ... John Woodstock wrote: ... > I think there is a security problem with that port.. ... The light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming dragon. ...
    (comp.security.unix)
  • Re: xinetd.d listening twice on port 69
    ... > But I am still bemused by the two listening sockets on the same port ... phenomenon constitute a security problem that needs to be addressed? ...
    (Fedora)