Thomas 'Balu' Walter
tw at itreff.de
Sat Jun 2 01:38:36 PDT 2001
+-Wil Cooley-(wcooley at nakedape.cc)-[02.06.01 07:53]:
> Thus spake Kristoffer Ekelund:
> > Ok, stunnel looks a tad complicated, but I'll look into it. It doesn't
> > look like a very elegant solution though. Not to me anyway... Are there
> > really no encrypted protocols for retriveing mail?
> I made RPMs for stunnel init scripts that'll start stunnel processes
> listening on the SSL-POP3 and SSL-IMAP ports. It's better to
> run stunnel this way, and is one reason I prefer it over sslwrap,
> because there is less overhead. You can read about it in the stunnel
> FAQ: http://www.stunnel.org/faq/run.html#ToC2. Even though mine
> are RPMs (and designed to integrate with a Red Hat system), you
> should be able to find enough in the init scripts to get you going:
> ftp://ftp.nakedape.cc/pub/packages/contrib/, imapsd and pop3sd.
Hm - I don't get your reason here... sslwrap can run in inetd and daemon
mode too, what do you mean by "less overhead"?
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-security-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-security