-This file contains descriptions of new features that have been added to Exim,
-but have not yet made it into the main manual (which is most conveniently
-updated when there is a relatively large batch of changes). The doc/ChangeLog
-file contains a listing of all changes, including bug fixes.
-
-
-Exim version 4.52
------------------
-
-TF/01 Support for checking Client SMTP Authorization has been added. CSA is a
- system which allows a site to advertise which machines are and are not
- permitted to send email. This is done by placing special SRV records in
- the DNS, which are looked up using the client's HELO domain. At this
- time CSA is still an Internet-Draft.
-
- Client SMTP Authorization checks are performed by the ACL condition
- verify=csa. This will fail if the client is not authorized. If there is
- a DNS problem, or if no valid CSA SRV record is found, or if the client
- is authorized, the condition succeeds. These three cases can be
- distinguished using the expansion variable $csa_status, which can take
- one of the values "fail", "defer", "unknown", or "ok". The condition
- does not itself defer because that would be likely to cause problems
- for legitimate email.
-
- The error messages produced by the CSA code include slightly more
- detail. If $csa_status is "defer" this may be because of problems
- looking up the CSA SRV record, or problems looking up the CSA target
- address record. There are four reasons for $csa_status being "fail":
- the client's host name is explicitly not authorized; the client's IP
- address does not match any of the CSA target IP addresses; the client's
- host name is authorized but it has no valid target IP addresses (e.g.
- the target's addresses are IPv6 and the client is using IPv4); or the
- client's host name has no CSA SRV record but a parent domain has
- asserted that all subdomains must be explicitly authorized.
-
- The verify=csa condition can take an argument which is the domain to
- use for the DNS query. The default is verify=csa/$sender_helo_name.
-
- This implementation includes an extension to CSA. If the query domain
- is an address literal such as [192.0.2.95], or if it is a bare IP
- address, Exim will search for CSA SRV records in the reverse DNS as if
- the HELO domain was e.g. 95.2.0.192.in-addr.arpa. Therefore it is
- meaningful to say, for example, verify=csa/$sender_host_address - in
- fact, this is the check that Exim performs if the client does not say
- HELO. This extension can be turned off by setting the main
- configuration option dns_csa_use_reverse = false.
-
- If a CSA SRV record is not found for the domain itself, then a search
- is performed through its parent domains for a record which might be
- making assertions about subdomains. The maximum depth of this search is
- limited using the main configuration option dns_csa_search_limit, which
- takes the value 5 by default. Exim does not look for CSA SRV records in
- a top level domain, so the default settings handle HELO domains as long
- as seven (hostname.five.four.three.two.one.com) which encompasses the
- vast majority of legitimate HELO domains.
-
- The dnsdb lookup also has support for CSA. Although dnsdb already
- supports SRV lookups, this is not sufficient because of the extra
- parent domain search behaviour of CSA, and (as with PTR lookups)
- dnsdb also turns IP addresses into lookups in the reverse DNS space.
- The result of ${lookup dnsdb {csa=$sender_helo_name} } has two
- space-separated fields: an authorization code and a target host name.
- The authorization code can be "Y" for yes, "N" for no, "X" for explicit
- authorization required but absent, or "?" for unknown.
-
-PH/01 The amount of output produced by the "make" process has been reduced,
- because the compile lines are often rather long, making it all pretty
- unreadable. The new style is along the lines of the 2.6 Linux kernel:
- just a short line for each module that is being compiled or linked.
- However, it is still possible to get the full output, by calling "make"
- like this:
-
- FULLECHO='' make -e
-
- The value of FULLECHO defaults to "@", the flag character that suppresses
- command reflection in "make". When you ask for the full output, it is
- given in addition to the the short output.
-
-PH/02 There have been two changes concerned with submission mode:
-
- (a) A new option, /name=value, makes it possible to supply a user name
- to be inserted into any created Sender: header line. Typically, this
- would be looked up from $authenticated_id.
-
- (b) The envelope sender address is forced to be the same as the
- submission mode sender address.
-
-TF/02 The control = fakereject ACL modifier now has a fakedefer counterpart,
- which works in exactly the same way except it causes a fake SMTP 450
- response after the message data instead of a fake SMTP 550 response.
- You must take care when using fakedefer because it will cause messages
- to be duplicated when the sender retries. Therefore you should not use
- fakedefer if the message will be delivered normally.
-
-
-Version 4.51
+This file contains descriptions of new features that have been added to Exim.
+Before a formal release, there may be quite a lot of detail so that people can
+test from the snapshots or the CVS before the documentation is updated. Once
+the documentation is updated, this file is reduced to a short list.
+
+Version 4.67
+------------
+
+ 1. There is a new log selector called smtp_no_mail, which is not included in
+ the default setting. When it is set, a line is written to the main log
+ whenever an accepted SMTP connection terminates without having issued a
+ MAIL command. This includes both the case when the connection is dropped,
+ and the case when QUIT is used. Note that it does not include cases where
+ the connection is rejected right at the start (by an ACL, or because there
+ are too many connections, or whatever). These cases already have their own
+ log lines.
+
+ The log line that is written contains the identity of the client in the
+ usual way, followed by D= and a time, which records the duration of the
+ connection. If the connection was authenticated, this fact is logged
+ exactly as it is for an incoming message, with an A= item. If the
+ connection was encrypted, CV=, DN=, and X= items may appear as they do for
+ an incoming message, controlled by the same logging options.
+
+ Finally, if any SMTP commands were issued during the connection, a C= item
+ is added to the line, listing the commands that were used. For example,
+
+ C=EHLO,QUIT
+
+ shows that the client issued QUIT straight after EHLO. If there were fewer
+ than 20 commands, they are all listed. If there were more than 20 commands,
+ the last 20 are listed, preceded by "...". However, with the default
+ setting of 10 for smtp_accep_max_nonmail, the connection will in any case
+ be aborted before 20 non-mail commands are processed.
+
+ 2. When an item in a dnslists list is followed by = and & and a list of IP
+ addresses, in order to restrict the match to specific results from the DNS
+ lookup, the behaviour was not clear when the lookup returned more than one
+ IP address. For example, consider the condition
+
+ dnslists = a.b.c=127.0.0.1
+
+ What happens if the DNS lookup for the incoming IP address yields both
+ 127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.2 by means of two separate DNS records? Is the
+ condition true because at least one given value was found, or is it false
+ because at least one of the found values was not listed? And how does this
+ affect negated conditions?
+
+ The behaviour of = and & has not been changed; however, the text below
+ documents it more clearly. In addition, two new additional conditions (==
+ and =&) have been added, to permit the "other" behaviour to be configured.
+
+ A DNS lookup may yield more than one record. Thus, the result of the lookup
+ for a dnslists check may yield more than one IP address. The question then
+ arises as to whether all the looked up addresses must be listed, or whether
+ just one is good enough. Both possibilities are provided for:
+
+ . If = or & is used, the condition is true if any one of the looked up
+ IP addresses matches one of the listed addresses. Consider:
+
+ dnslists = a.b.c=127.0.0.1
+
+ If the DNS lookup yields both 127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.2, the condition is
+ true because 127.0.0.1 matches.
+
+ . If == or =& is used, the condition is true only if every one of the
+ looked up IP addresses matches one of the listed addresses. Consider:
+
+ dnslists = a.b.c==127.0.0.1
+
+ If the DNS lookup yields both 127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.2, the condition is
+ false because 127.0.0.2 is not listed. You would need to have
+
+ dnslists = a.b.c==127.0.0.1,127.0.0.2
+
+ for the condition to be true.
+
+ When ! is used to negate IP address matching, it inverts the result, giving
+ the precise opposite of the behaviour above. Thus:
+
+ . If != or !& is used, the condition is true if none of the looked up IP
+ addresses matches one of the listed addresses. Consider:
+
+ dnslists = a.b.c!&0.0.0.1
+
+ If the DNS lookup yields both 127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.2, the condition is
+ false because 127.0.0.1 matches.
+
+ . If !== or !=& is used, the condition is true there is at least one looked
+ up IP address that does not match. Consider:
+
+ dnslists = a.b.c!=&0.0.0.1
+
+ If the DNS lookup yields both 127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.2, the condition is
+ true, because 127.0.0.2 does not match. You would need to have
+
+ dnslists = a.b.c!=&0.0.0.1,0.0.0.2
+
+ for the condition to be false.
+
+ When the DNS lookup yields only a single IP address, there is no difference
+ between = and == and between & and =&.
+
+
+Version 4.66
+------------
+
+No new features were added to 4.66.
+
+
+Version 4.65
git://git.exim.org / exim.git / blobdiff