similar to: CRAM-MD5 auth broken with postgresql passdb?

Hello all. Im try to make a SMTP Auth using Docecot SASL. Im use swaks for tests. Im store users in LDAP. As im understand for CRAM & DIGEST MD5 we need to store pass in a clear text?... Ok. mail: admin3 at domain.off userPassword: 123 <- Clear text What im do %swaks -a CRAM-MD5 -au admin3 at domain.off -ap 123 To: admin3 at domain.off === Trying mx.domain.off:25... === Connected to

Hi, the log file shows suspicious entries as follows: Apr 3 09:14:49 xxx dovecot: imap(user at domain): Error: fts_solr: Lookup failed: 400 Bad Request The tomcat7 log shows for this request: 10.0.0.234 - - [03/Apr/2016:09:14:49 +0200] "GET null null" 400 - Dovecot is latest 2.2.23 with a pretty standard FTS config copied from the wiki: mail_plugins = " acl fts fts_solr"

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Stephan Bosch <stephan at rename-it.nl> wrote: >> Unfortunately I do not know (yet) which client action produces these >> log lines. "GET null null" seems not to be a sensible request in any >> case. >> >> Anyone seeing the same effect? > > > Did this happen only after upgrade to 2.2.23 or is this a fresh

/etc/dovecot.conf: auth default { mechanisms=plain login cram-md5 passdb { #.............. Windows Live Mail: CRAM-MD5 authentication failed. This could be due to a lack of memory on your system. Your IMAP command could not be sent to the server, due to non-network errors. This could, for example, indicate a lack of memory on your system. Configuration: Account: Sheltoncomputers

Hi, after getting dovecot working with PostgreSQL and plaintext passwords I tried to use md5 encrypted passwords with mozilla. www.roughtrade.net/dovecot says that Mozilla only supports CRAM-MD5 and that CRAM-MD5 is included in HEAD. Now I have two questions: 1) Is the md5 hash stored in passdb with cram-md5 the same as in digest-md5? 2) Is a new dovecot stable build planned within the next two

I don't desagree with your vision, but if the use of CRAM-XXXX has to use plaint text password's on the server there's a dark side, or there's a CRAM-XXX that can use encrypted on server side? There's always the thing that can clients don't support it. I think i'm not wrong with what i said, On 20 Jun 2019, at 02:53, FUSTE Emmanuel via dovecot <dovecot at

hello dovecot community, question; if my user database and dovecot installation is currently setup to use plain login passwords, and i want to convert to cram-md5, after i configure dovecot accordingly and reset passwords into cram-md5, if anyone uses plain login method again in the future, will it still work? or must they always from this point on use encrypted passwords? Thanks. -- Thanks,

After upgrading my dovecot installation about a month ago, I have started seeing "Requested CRAM-MD5 scheme, but we have only MD5-CRYPT" message from dovecot in my logs. Any help in finding and correcting the cause will be greatly appreciated. --Richard

Hi all, Got a question on configuring dovecot, I'm still new at this so I might be doing this all wrong. I want dovecot to authenticate the mail client using CRAM-MD5 so I've setup the config in dovecot.conf: auth default { mechanisms = cram-md5 passdb sql { # Path for SQL configuration file, see doc/dovecot-sql-example.conf args = /etc/dovecot/dovecot-sql.conf

We have a plethora of accounts for which we would like to enable CRAM-MD5 but their passwords are stored as MD5 hashes. Is there anything we can do? Can we take a linux MD5 hashed password (e.g. $1$fac330ee$wd6Tll...) and convert it to dovecot's CRAM-MD5 format (e.g. {CRAM-MD5}b3f297...)? Thanks!

Howdy, I'm using dovecot and mysql users, and i'm creating the password with: ENCRYPT('some-passwd',CONCAT('$6$', SUBSTRING(SHA(RAND()), -16))) So far so good, everything's fine. Today saw that i didn't enabled CRAM-MD5, but if I do, and the (at least) IMAP client (roundcube/thunderbird/etc) issues CRAM-MD5 it doesn't authenticate. What am i doing wrong, or

Le 20/06/2019 ? 12:25, @lbutlr via dovecot a ?crit?: > On 20 Jun 2019, at 04:14, Jorge Bastos via dovecot <dovecot at dovecot.org> wrote: >> I don't desagree with your vision, but if the use of CRAM-XXXX has to use >> plaint text password's on the server there's a dark side, or there's a >> CRAM-XXX that can use encrypted on server side? There's

Hi all, When setting auth mechanisms: plain login cram-md5 and only having pam passdb and passwd userdb. dovecot nevers starts and crashes reporting: Feb 29 10:19:41 pitux-clust-op1 dovecot: Dovecot v1.0.10 starting up Feb 29 10:19:41 pitux-clust-op1 dovecot: auth(default): CRAM-MD5 mechanism can't be supported with given passdbs Feb 29 10:19:41 pitux-clust-op1 dovecot: Auth process died

Hello. dovecot 2.2.26.0 When testing nopassword extra field (http://wiki2.dovecot.org/PasswordDatabase/ExtraFields) with CRAM-MD5 dovecot doesn't allow any password (while it should) and returns " Authentication failed" while in logs: Nov 17 08:22:34 auth-worker(1551): Info: sql(pepe,127.0.0.1,<Y8amDXpBptV/AAAB>): Requested CRAM-MD5 scheme, but we have a NULL password

On 19.6.2019 7.48, Alexander Dalloz via dovecot wrote: > Am 19.06.2019 um 00:04 schrieb Jorge Bastos via dovecot: >> Howdy, >> >> I'm using dovecot and mysql users, and i'm creating the password with: >> >> ENCRYPT('some-passwd',CONCAT('$6$', SUBSTRING(SHA(RAND()), -16))) >> >> So far so good, everything's fine. >>

Hi Timo, Mozilla 1.5 doesn't understand DIGEST-MD5; it only speaks CRAM-MD5 or PLAIN. Maybe other clients have the same problem. My users like Mozilla, so I wrote new code for Dovecot to speak CRAM-MD5, using your mech-digest-md5.c as a reference. Attached diff in two formats i) for current CVS ii) against last release both tested and working with Mozilla and KMail's CRAM-MD5. I

Hello, I am wondering which variant is more secure for user authentication and password scheme. Basically I am looking at both variants: 1) MD5-CRYPT password scheme storage with CRAM-MD5 auth mechanism 2) SHA512-CRYPT password scheme storage with PLAIN auth mechanism In my opinion the option 2) should be safer although it is using PLAIN auth mechanism. Of course I would always use STARTTLS and

Hello, i have a setup with two director servers pointing to two backends. I don't care that much for load balancing, my main goal is high availability. CRAM-MD5 auth is working fine if I connect directly to the backends, but the director only supports AUTH=PLAIN because of the static passdb. director config: > passdb { > driver = static > args = nopassword=y proxy=y > } >

On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:41:06 -0600 "@lbutlr via dovecot" <dovecot at dovecot.org> wrote: > What is the reason for wanting to enable CRAM-MD5? That was intended > to use on unsecured connections; you should not be allowing > authentication on unsecured connections in 2019. > > Establish a secure submission on port 587 or smtps on 465 and do not > use CRAM-MD5 at

When using proxy_maybe CRAM-MD5 authentication fails when the connection is proxied. Is this expected behavior? Is proxy_maybe too simplified for this case? We're using SQL so I could rewrite the query with IFs to fake proxy_maybe and return the password as NULL and nologin as Y, but if it works that way couldn't it work with proxy_maybe? This works: password_query = \ SELECT NULL AS