On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 21:15, J Sloan wrote: > > Yeah vsftpd is bare bones, but it does what is > needed - I do admit I'd love to have ftpwho > for vsftpd though... That's precisely why i said "use vsftpd if there are no special reasons to use something else". vsftpd is very simple, very "bare-bones". Of course there's no point in using it for complex setups. When there is a need for complex functionality, i usually use PureFTPD. It seems like Pure has a good balance between functionality and security. Of course, it's not a cure for cancer or world famine, but it seems to do its job. I just don't feel confident enough, from a security perspective, with either WU-FTPD or ProFTPD (after using Pro for a long while and generally liking its feature set and the fact that it's "sysadmin friendly"). OTOH, if some feature in WU or Pro is _required_, well, i guess there's no choice, just use them, take good care of them, update often and keep your fingers crossed. :-) > I'd be curious to know what you're doing with > sendmail that you don't think postfix can do I'm not sure whether this is actually the point. Each one of these MTAs has capabilities that the other one doesn't. Of course it makes sense to use Sendmail when you need some of its unique features; same goes for Postfix. So it's kinda pointless to debate that. The point is - security. While i need to wake up in the night every once in a while 'cause there's Yet Another Critical Security Bug (TM) related to Sendmail and servers need to be taken care of, i have yet to see even a minor glitch with Postfix. -- Florin Andrei "When ideas fail, words come in very handy." - Goethe
