liable to incompatible change.
-PRDR support
---------------------------------------------------------------
-
-Per-Recipient Data Reponse is an SMTP extension proposed by Eric Hall
-in a (now-expired) IETF draft from 2007. It's not hit mainstream
-use, but has apparently been implemented in the META1 MTA.
-
-There is mention at http://mail.aegee.org/intern/sendmail.html
-of a patch to sendmail "to make it PRDR capable".
-
- ref: http://www.eric-a-hall.com/specs/draft-hall-prdr-00.txt
-
-If Exim is built with EXPERIMENTAL_PRDR there is a new config
-boolean "prdr_enable" which controls whether PRDR is advertised
-as part of an EHLO response, a new "acl_data_smtp_prdr" ACL
-(called for each recipient, after data arrives but before the
-data ACL), and a new smtp transport option "hosts_try_prdr".
-
-PRDR may be used to support per-user content filtering. Without it
-one must defer any recipient after the first that has a different
-content-filter configuration. With PRDR, the RCPT-time check
-for this can be disabled when the MAIL-time $smtp_command included
-"PRDR". Any required difference in behaviour of the main DATA-time
-ACL should however depend on the PRDR-time ACL having run, as Exim
-will avoid doing so in some situations (eg. single-recipient mails).
-
-
-
-OCSP Stapling support
---------------------------------------------------------------
-
-X.509 PKI certificates expire and can be revoked; to handle this, the
-clients need some way to determine if a particular certificate, from a
-particular Certificate Authority (CA), is still valid. There are three
-main ways to do so.
-
-The simplest way is to serve up a Certificate Revocation List (CRL) with
-an ordinary web-server, regenerating the CRL before it expires. The
-downside is that clients have to periodically re-download a potentially
-huge file from every certificate authority it knows of.
-
-The way with most moving parts at query time is Online Certificate
-Status Protocol (OCSP), where the client verifies the certificate
-against an OCSP server run by the CA. This lets the CA track all
-usage of the certs. This requires running software with access to the
-private key of the CA, to sign the responses to the OCSP queries. OCSP
-is based on HTTP and can be proxied accordingly.
-
-The only widespread OCSP server implementation (known to this writer)
-comes as part of OpenSSL and aborts on an invalid request, such as
-connecting to the port and then disconnecting. This requires
-re-entering the passphrase each time some random client does this.
-
-The third way is OCSP Stapling; in this, the server using a certificate
-issued by the CA periodically requests an OCSP proof of validity from
-the OCSP server, then serves it up inline as part of the TLS
-negotiation. This approach adds no extra round trips, does not let the
-CA track users, scales well with number of certs issued by the CA and is
-resilient to temporary OCSP server failures, as long as the server
-starts retrying to fetch an OCSP proof some time before its current
-proof expires. The downside is that it requires server support.
-
-If Exim is built with EXPERIMENTAL_OCSP and it was built with OpenSSL,
-then it gains a new global option: "tls_ocsp_file".
-
-The file specified therein is expected to be in DER format, and contain
-an OCSP proof. Exim will serve it as part of the TLS handshake. This
-option will be re-expanded for SNI, if the tls_certificate option
-contains $tls_sni, as per other TLS options.
-
-Exim does not at this time implement any support for fetching a new OCSP
-proof. The burden is on the administrator to handle this, outside of
-Exim. The file specified should be replaced atomically, so that the
-contents are always valid. Exim will expand the "tls_ocsp_file" option
-on each connection, so a new file will be handled transparently on the
-next connection.
-
-Exim will check for a valid next update timestamp in the OCSP proof;
-if not present, or if the proof has expired, it will be ignored.
-
-Also, given EXPERIMENTAL_OCSP and OpenSSL, the smtp transport gains
-a "hosts_require_ocsp" option; a host-list for which an OCSP Stapling
-is requested and required for the connection to proceed. The host(s)
-should also be in "hosts_require_tls", and "tls_verify_certificates"
-configured for the transport.
-
-At this point in time, we're gathering feedback on use, to determine if
-it's worth adding complexity to the Exim daemon to periodically re-fetch
-OCSP files and somehow handling multiple files.
-
-
-
-
Brightmail AntiSpam (BMI) suppport
--------------------------------------------------------------
This means the queried domain has published
a SPF record, but wants to allow outside
servers to send mail under its domain as well.
- o err_perm This indicates a syntax error in the SPF
- record of the queried domain. This should be
- treated like "none".
- o err_temp This indicates a temporary error during all
+ This should be treated like "none".
+ o permerror This indicates a syntax error in the SPF
+ record of the queried domain. You may deny
+ messages when this occurs. (Changed in 4.83)
+ o temperror This indicates a temporary error during all
processing, including Exim's SPF processing.
You may defer messages when this occurs.
+ (Changed in 4.83)
+ o err_temp Same as permerror, deprecated in 4.83, will be
+ removed in a future release.
+ o err_perm Same as temperror, deprecated in 4.83, will be
+ removed in a future release.
You can prefix each string with an exclamation mark to invert
-is meaning, for example "!fail" will match all results but
+its meaning, for example "!fail" will match all results but
"fail". The string list is evaluated left-to-right, in a
short-circuit fashion. When a string matches the outcome of
the SPF check, the condition succeeds. If none of the listed
$spf_result
This contains the outcome of the SPF check in string form,
- one of pass, fail, softfail, none, neutral, err_perm or
- err_temp.
+ one of pass, fail, softfail, none, neutral, permerror or
+ temperror.
$spf_smtp_comment
This contains a string that can be used in a SMTP response
would relax host matching rules to a broader network range.
+A lookup expansion is also available. It takes an email
+address as the key and an IP address as the database:
+
+ $lookup (username@domain} spf {ip.ip.ip.ip}}
+
+The lookup will return the same result strings as they can appear in
+$spf_result (pass,fail,softfail,neutral,none,err_perm,err_temp).
+Currently, only IPv4 addresses are supported.
+
+
+
SRS (Sender Rewriting Scheme) Support
--------------------------------------------------------------
DCC Support
--------------------------------------------------------------
+Distributed Checksum Clearinghouse; http://www.rhyolite.com/dcc/
*) Building exim
DMARC verification should *not* be performed for them and disable
DMARC with a control setting:
- control = dmarc_verify_disable
+ control = dmarc_disable_verify
A DMARC record can also specify a "forensic address", which gives
exim an email address to submit reports about failed alignment.
configure a dmarc_forensic_sender because the default sender address
construction might be inadequate.
- control = dmarc_forensic_enable
+ control = dmarc_enable_forensic
(AGAIN: You can choose not to send these forensic reports by simply
-not putting the dmarc_forensic_enable control line at any point in
+not putting the dmarc_enable_forensic control line at any point in
your exim config. If you don't tell it to send them, it will not
send them.)
rejecting the email.
o quarantine The DMARC check failed and the library recommends
keeping it for further inspection.
+ o none The DMARC check passed and the library recommends
+ no specific action, neutral.
o norecord No policy section in the DMARC record for this
sender domain.
o nofrom Unable to determine the domain of the sender.
- o none There is no DMARC record for this sender domain.
- o error Library error or dns error.
+ o temperror Library error or dns error.
+ o off The DMARC check was disabled for this email.
You can prefix each string with an exclamation mark to invert its
meaning, for example "!accept" will match all results but
Of course, you can also use any other lookup method that Exim
supports, including LDAP, Postgres, MySQL, etc, as long as the
-result is a list of colon-separated strings;
+result is a list of colon-separated strings.
Several expansion variables are set before the DATA ACL is
processed, and you can use them in this ACL. The following
o $dmarc_status
This is a one word status indicating what the DMARC library
- thinks of the email.
+ thinks of the email. It is a combination of the results of
+ DMARC record lookup and the SPF/DKIM/DMARC processing results
+ (if a DMARC record was found). The actual policy declared
+ in the DMARC record is in a separate expansion variable.
o $dmarc_status_text
This is a slightly longer, human readable status.
This is the domain which DMARC used to look up the DMARC
policy record.
+ o $dmarc_domain_policy
+ This is the policy declared in the DMARC record. Valid values
+ are "none", "reject" and "quarantine". It is blank when there
+ is any error, including no DMARC record.
+
o $dmarc_ar_header
This is the entire Authentication-Results header which you can
add using an add_header modifier.
(RCPT ACL)
warn domains = +local_domains
hosts = +local_hosts
- control = dmarc_verify_disable
+ control = dmarc_disable_verify
warn !domains = +screwed_up_dmarc_records
control = dmarc_enable_forensic
+ warn condition = (lookup if destined to mailing list)
+ set acl_m_mailing_list = 1
+
(DATA ACL)
warn dmarc_status = accept : none : off
!authenticated = *
set $acl_m_quarantine = 1
# Do something in a transport with this flag variable
+ deny condition = ${if eq{$dmarc_domain_policy}{reject}}
+ condition = ${if eq{$acl_m_mailing_list}{1}}
+ message = Messages from $dmarc_used_domain break mailing lists
+
deny dmarc_status = reject
!authenticated = *
- message = Message from $domain_used_domain failed sender's DMARC policy, REJECT
+ message = Message from $dmarc_used_domain failed sender's DMARC policy, REJECT
+
+
+
+DANE
+------------------------------------------------------------
+DNS-based Authentication of Named Entities, as applied
+to SMTP over TLS, provides assurance to a client that
+it is actually talking to the server it wants to rather
+than some attacker operating a Man In The Middle (MITM)
+operation. The latter can terminate the TLS connection
+you make, and make another one to the server (so both
+you and the server still think you have an encrypted
+connection) and, if one of the "well known" set of
+Certificate Authorities has been suborned - something
+which *has* been seen already (2014), a verifiable
+certificate (if you're using normal root CAs, eg. the
+Mozilla set, as your trust anchors).
+
+What DANE does is replace the CAs with the DNS as the
+trust anchor. The assurance is limited to a) the possibility
+that the DNS has been suborned, b) mistakes made by the
+admins of the target server. The attack surface presented
+by (a) is thought to be smaller than that of the set
+of root CAs.
+
+It also allows the server to declare (implicitly) that
+connections to it should use TLS. An MITM could simply
+fail to pass on a server's STARTTLS.
+
+DANE scales better than having to maintain (and
+side-channel communicate) copies of server certificates
+for every possible target server. It also scales
+(slightly) better than having to maintain on an SMTP
+client a copy of the standard CAs bundle. It also
+means not having to pay a CA for certificates.
+
+DANE requires a server operator to do three things:
+1) run DNSSEC. This provides assurance to clients
+that DNS lookups they do for the server have not
+been tampered with. The domain MX record applying
+to this server, its A record, its TLSA record and
+any associated CNAME records must all be covered by
+DNSSEC.
+2) add TLSA DNS records. These say what the server
+certificate for a TLS connection should be.
+3) offer a server certificate, or certificate chain,
+in TLS connections which is traceable to the one
+defined by (one of?) the TSLA records
+
+There are no changes to Exim specific to server-side
+operation of DANE.
+
+The TLSA record for the server may have "certificate
+usage" of DANE-TA(2) or DANE-EE(3). The latter specifies
+the End Entity directly, i.e. the certificate involved
+is that of the server (and should be the sole one transmitted
+during the TLS handshake); this is appropriate for a
+single system, using a self-signed certificate.
+ DANE-TA usage is effectively declaring a specific CA
+to be used; this might be a private CA or a public,
+well-known one. A private CA at simplest is just
+a self-signed certificate which is used to sign
+cerver certificates, but running one securely does
+require careful arrangement. If a private CA is used
+then either all clients must be primed with it, or
+(probably simpler) the server TLS handshake must transmit
+the entire certificate chain from CA to server-certificate.
+If a public CA is used then all clients must be primed with it
+(losing one advantage of DANE) - but the attack surface is
+reduced from all public CAs to that single CA.
+DANE-TA is commonly used for several services and/or
+servers, each having a TLSA query-domain CNAME record,
+all of which point to a single TLSA record.
+
+The TLSA record should have a Selector field of SPKI(1)
+and a Matching Type field of SHA2-512(2).
+
+At the time of writing, https://www.huque.com/bin/gen_tlsa
+is useful for quickly generating TLSA records; and commands like
+
+ openssl x509 -in -pubkey -noout <certificate.pem \
+ | openssl rsa -outform der -pubin 2>/dev/null \
+ | openssl sha512 \
+ | awk '{print $2}'
+
+are workable for 4th-field hashes.
+
+For use with the DANE-TA model, server certificates
+must have a correct name (SubjectName or SubjectAltName).
+
+The use of OCSP-stapling should be considered, allowing
+for fast revocation of certificates (which would otherwise
+be limited by the DNS TTL on the TLSA records). However,
+this is likely to only be usable with DANE-TA. NOTE: the
+default of requesting OCSP for all hosts is modified iff
+DANE is in use, to:
+
+ hosts_request_ocsp = ${if or { {= {0}{$tls_out_tlsa_usage}} \
+ {= {4}{$tls_out_tlsa_usage}} } \
+ {*}{}}
+
+The (new) variable $tls_out_tlsa_usage is a bitfield with
+numbered bits set for TLSA record usage codes.
+The zero above means DANE was not in use,
+the four means that only DANE-TA usage TLSA records were
+found. If the definition of hosts_request_ocsp includes the
+string "tls_out_tlsa_usage", they are re-expanded in time to
+control the OCSP request.
+
+This modification of hosts_request_ocsp is only done if
+it has the default value of "*". Admins who change it, and
+those who use hosts_require_ocsp, should consider the interaction
+with DANE in their OCSP settings.
+
+
+For client-side DANE there are two new smtp transport options,
+hosts_try_dane and hosts_require_dane. They do the obvious thing.
+[ should they be domain-based rather than host-based? ]
+
+DANE will only be usable if the target host has DNSSEC-secured
+MX, A and TLSA records.
+
+A TLSA lookup will be done if either of the above options match
+and the host-lookup succeded using dnssec.
+If a TLSA lookup is done and succeeds, a DANE-verified TLS connection
+will be required for the host.
+
+(TODO: specify when fallback happens vs. when the host is not used)
+
+If DANE is requested and useable (see above) the following transport
+options are ignored:
+ hosts_require_tls
+ tls_verify_hosts
+ tls_try_verify_hosts
+ tls_verify_certificates
+ tls_crl
+ tls_verify_cert_hostnames
+
+If DANE is not usable, whether requested or not, and CA-anchored
+verification evaluation is wanted, the above variables should be set
+appropriately.
+
+Currently dnssec_request_domains must be active (need to think about that)
+and dnssec_require_domains is ignored.
+
+If verification was successful using DANE then the "CV" item
+in the delivery log line will show as "CV=dane".
+
+There is a new variable $tls_out_dane which will have "yes" if
+verification succeeded using DANE and "no" otherwise (only useful
+in combination with EXPERIMENTAL_EVENT), and a new variable
+$tls_out_tlsa_usage (detailed above).
+
+
+
+DSN extra information
+---------------------
+If compiled with EXPERIMENTAL_DSN_INFO extra information will be added
+to DSN fail messages ("bounces"), when available. The intent is to aid
+tracing of specific failing messages, when presented with a "bounce"
+complaint and needing to search logs.
+
+
+The remote MTA IP address, with port number if nonstandard.
+Example:
+ Remote-MTA: X-ip; [127.0.0.1]:587
+Rationale:
+ Several addresses may correspond to the (already available)
+ dns name for the remote MTA.
+
+The remote MTA connect-time greeting.
+Example:
+ X-Remote-MTA-smtp-greeting: X-str; 220 the.local.host.name ESMTP Exim x.yz Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:44:33 +0000
+Rationale:
+ This string sometimes presents the remote MTA's idea of its
+ own name, and sometimes identifies the MTA software.
+
+The remote MTA response to HELO or EHLO.
+Example:
+ X-Remote-MTA-helo-response: X-str; 250-the.local.host.name Hello localhost [127.0.0.1]
+Limitations:
+ Only the first line of a multiline response is recorded.
+Rationale:
+ This string sometimes presents the remote MTA's view of
+ the peer IP connecting to it.
+
+The reporting MTA detailed diagnostic.
+Example:
+ X-Exim-Diagnostic: X-str; SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:<d3@myhost.test.ex>: 550 hard error
+Rationale:
+ This string somtimes give extra information over the
+ existing (already available) Diagnostic-Code field.
+
+
+Note that non-RFC-documented field names and data types are used.
git://git.exim.org / users / jgh / exim.git / blobdiff