[KLUG Members] help with cyrus imap ...

[Bruce Smith]

> > I'm tempted to have sendmail use procmail for it's delivery, and have
> > procmailrc deliver it's result to cyrus-imap via a pipe ...  but I
> 
> Probably the best bet.
> 
> > suppose that's a bad idea?  Any reasons besides the extra overhead?
> 
> The Cyrusoft people point out a myriad of potential security issues in
> having a turing system (which according to them procmail is) like
> procmail involved in mail delivery.

You definitely have a lot more opportunity to write your own security
holes with procmail, and I suppose there is the possibility for a
procmail exploit to be uncovered someday ...

My major concern is this:  I just finished writing a challenge-response
email system in procmail, where if you're not in my address book, you
get an automated reply pointing you to a URL, and if you follow the
instructions on the web page your email is moved from my "pending"
folder to my "Inbox" and you are added to my address book.

Almost all of my spam ends up in "pending".  Plus I have ways to file
messages direct into folders (without the "+"), and accept or block
email based on "To: as well as "From:", as well as entire domains.
And it's all managed through squirrelmail (our webmail).

Now if It upgrade to Cyrus, I'm going to lose all of this.

I noticed the PHP frontends for sieve lets you do "vacation" processing,
and since that involves an automated reply, I was hoping to be able to
rewrite my challenge-response system in sieve.  But it looks like that's
not possible....

I guess I'll try using procmail, and have procmail deliver to cyrus via
piping to the "deliver" program.

Speaking of "deliver", any idea what the "-e" parameter does?  It's not
documented in the man page, but sendmail uses it to deliver to cyrus. 
And it's a valid option, because it doesn't complain about "-e" like it
does if you really give it an invalid option.

 - BS