• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu

PMMail - Secure transfer setup

Started by melf, 2012.06.08, 13:23:49

Previous topic - Next topic

melf

I intend to begin to use PMMail again and I'm trying to set up Secure transfer. For one account there is no trouble, but if you got several accounts needing secure transfer it complains that the local port (e.g. 110) already exists in another account. The help pages suggest another way of setting up several accounts and in the same time keep the original (nonsecured) account setting. My problem is that I don't really understand the instructions :-). Is there someone using PMMAil that could give me a hand?
/Mikael

DougB

QuoteIs there someone using PMMAil that could give me a hand?

Sure. PMMail uses STunnel for secure transfer. That means that PMMail talks to STunnel, and STunnel does the secure transfer to the secure server. PMMail doesn't really know about STunnel, it just communicates with a standard port number (usually 25 for SMTP and 110 for POP). When STunnel is configured, it captures those two local ports, converts them to the secure ports, on the target server, and does the appropriate communication. Think of it as being a PROXY server. In the simple case, you configure PMMail to use the standard ports (25 and 110), and use the server addresses. STunnel is configured to accept the standard local ports, and use the secure ports on the server.

Okay, now you wish to add a second secure server. You set STunnel to use the secure ports on the server (which would be different than the other server, but probably uses the same ports). Since the other account interface to STunnel is already using the standard (local) ports (25 and 110), you need to use different ports. What I do, is use ports 1025 and 1110 (they must be otherwise unused on your system). Then set PMMail to use those ports, in place of the standard local ports. If there is yet another account that requires secure access, use ports 2025 and 2110, etc. If those ports are already being used on your system, you would probably know about it. In that case, just select a different one that is not being used.

You could use 1026, and 1111, in place of 2025, and 2110, but by keeping the standard port number as part of your assigned number, it helps to avoid confusion.

You could also use Help-> Voice on the web-> PMMail FAQ. There is a bit more information there. You may also find other useful information.

melf

Thanks Doug for your comprehensive answer. I looked at the help files once again and found that if I scrolled down a lot more, what you said was there black on white. And it works, Thanks!
/Mikael

melf

And another, more general question if you or anyone else knows. I just remembered why I stopped using PMMail - it doesn't support IMAP. Will IMAP be supported in a near future?
/Mikael

DougB

QuoteWill IMAP be supported in a near future?

IMAP was put on the PMMail development path in 2006. Unfortunately, the guy who volunteered to do it, backed out, and nothing has been done with IMAP. It is still one of the things on the "ToDo" list, but I know that James Moe (the lead - and only - programer) doesn't have the time to do it. He is still up to his eyeballs trying to get the base program to work properly. He has done some marvelous work, but the latest updates have proven to be very problematic, and he has other things that he needs to take care of, so progress has been slow. Having said that, PMMail 3.11 works far better than the old PMMail 2.20 ever did, plus it has support for a number of new things. IMAP just isn't one of them.

If anybody is interested in tackling the IMAP part, speak up, and I will put you in touch with the appropriate people. A good understanding of C++ programming, and IMAP, would be very helpful.

For those who don't know, all of the development for the PMMail project is done by unpaid volunteers. VOICE charges users a one time fee, equivalent to the cost of a normal membership in VOICE (you also need to be a member of VOICE to get a PMMail license, which is good forever). The proceeds go toward supporting the OS2/eCS community. There is no profit involved.

You can get more information about PMMail at: pmmail.os2voice.org/index.php?title=PMMail_for_OS/2

melf

#5
Thanks again for information.

UPDATE: I found a workaround for my work mail, where my employer just offer IMAP. It was possible to simply redirect to one of my POP accounts. That's good, PMMail offers some nice functionality and is very fast.


Anyway IMAP would be a great feature.
/Mikael

DougB

QuoteI found a workaround for my work mail, where my employer just offer IMAP. It was possible to simply redirect to one of my POP accounts.

Hmmm. That is a good idea, but I am sure that it has a few problems to overcome. Many users probably would not be allowed to redirect mail off of the company mail server.

QuoteAnyway IMAP would be a great feature.

Over the last couple of years, I have thought about IMAP a bit. I am not so sure that it is a great idea. In some cases, it can be very convenient, but in most cases, it is an unacceptable (IMO) security exposure. Of course, having that stuff on a laptop, or other e-mail capable device, is also a security exposure. The whole e-mail thing is not very secure, even if you use something like PGP, or GPG (both work with PMMail).

melf

In my case I think the most important is that my emails are left on the server also. As my work is governed by the principle of public access emails should be available. About IMAP, I don't generally like to have my own docs and so in other places than on my harddrive, but there are of course also moments when that might be more secure. My statement that it would be a great feature is only based on the fact that IMAP is becoming "popular" and more an more used by ISPs. I guess it follows the "cloud" trend where everything is going to be stored at somebody else's servers. Seems like our private domain is going not public but corporate, and I don't like it.
/Mikael