docs/diploma

annotate thesis/tex/5-Improvements.tex @ 333:5f416c27e932

rework in the resulting architecture
author meillo@marmaro.de
date Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:26:59 +0100
parents 4d705f7a956a
children 100efdd32ea5
rev   line source
meillo@246 1 \chapter{Improvement plans}
meillo@89 2
meillo@317 3 The last chapter came to the result that further development is best done in a double-strategy. First the existing code base should be improved to satisfy the most important needs in order to make it usable for some more time. Then \masqmail\ should get redesigned from scratch and rebuild to gain a secure and modern \MTA\ architecture for the future.
meillo@109 4
meillo@317 5 This chapter finally gives concrete suggestions \emph{how} to realize these plans.
meillo@249 6
meillo@317 7 The first part covers the short-time goals which base on current code. The second part deals with the long-time goal---the redesign.
meillo@89 8
meillo@184 9
meillo@184 10
meillo@184 11
meillo@287 12 \section{Based on current code}
meillo@125 13
meillo@249 14 The first three \TODO{}s are implementable by improving the current code or by adding wrappers or interposition filters. The following sections describe solution approaches to do that work.
meillo@184 15
meillo@184 16
meillo@184 17
meillo@326 18 \subsection{Encryption}
meillo@246 19
meillo@332 20 Encryption should be the first functionality to add to the current code. This requirement was already discussed on page \pageref{requirement-encryption}. As explained there, \NAME{STARTTLS} encryption---as defined in \RFC\,2487---should be added to \masqmail.
meillo@246 21
meillo@317 22 Adding encryption requires changes mainly in three source files: \path{smtp_in.c}, \path{smtp_out.c}, and in \path{conf.c}.
meillo@246 23
meillo@317 24 The first file includes the functionality for the \SMTP\ server. It needs to offer \NAME{STARTTLS} support to clients and needs to initiate the encryption when the client requests it. Additionally, the server should be able to insist on encryption before it accepts any message.
meillo@246 25
meillo@317 26 The second file includes the functionality for the \SMTP\ client. It should start the encryption by issuing the \NAME{STARTTLS} keyword if the server supports it. It should be possible to send messages only if encryption is possible.
meillo@246 27
meillo@332 28 The third file controls the configuration files. New configuration option need to be added. The encryption policy for incoming connections needs to be defined. Three choices seem necessary: no encryption, offer encryption, insist on encryption. The encryption policy for outgoing connections should be part of each route setup. The options are the same: never encrypt, encrypt if possible, insist on encryption.
meillo@246 29
meillo@317 30 \NAME{STARTTLS} uses \NAME{TLS} encryption which is based on certificates. Thus the \MTA\ needs its own certificate. This should be generated during installation. A third party application like \name{openssl} should be taken for this job. The encryption itself should also be done using an available library. Open\NAME{SSL} or a substitute like Gnu\NAME{TLS} does then become a dependency for \masqmail. Gnu\NAME{TLS} seems to be the better choice because the Open\NAME{SSL} license is incompatible to the \NAME{GPL}, under which \masqmail\ and Gnu\NAME{TLS} are covered.
meillo@246 31
meillo@317 32 User definable paths to \masqmail's secret key, \masqmail's certificate, and the public certificates of trusted \name{Certificate Authorities} (short: \NAME{CA}s) are also nice to have.
meillo@246 33
meillo@246 34
meillo@317 35 << TLS patch of qmail >>
meillo@246 36
meillo@246 37 %postfix: main.cf
meillo@317 38 %
meillo@246 39 % smtpd_use_tls = yes
meillo@246 40 % smtpd_tls_received_header = no (does not log in received headers)
meillo@246 41 %
meillo@246 42 % smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/key.pem
meillo@246 43 % smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/cert.pem
meillo@246 44 % smtpd_tls_CA_file = /etc/postfix/CAcert.pem
meillo@246 45 %
meillo@246 46 % smtp_use_tls = yes (use TLS for sending)
meillo@246 47 % smtp_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/key.pem
meillo@246 48 % smtp_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/cert.pem
meillo@246 49 % smtp_tls_CA_file = /etc/postfix/CAcert.pem
meillo@246 50
meillo@246 51
meillo@246 52
meillo@184 53
meillo@326 54 \subsection{Authentication}
meillo@125 55
meillo@317 56 Authentication is the second function to add; it is important to restrict the access to \masqmail, especially for mail relay. The requirements for authentication where identified on page \pageref{requirement-authentication}.
meillo@184 57
meillo@317 58 Static access restriction, based on the \NAME{IP} address is already possible by using \name{TCP Wrappers}. This makes it easy to refuse all connections from outside the local net for example, which is a good prevention of being an open relay. More detailed static restrictions, like splitting between mail for the system and mail to relay, should not be added to the current code. This may be a concern for the new design.
meillo@277 59
meillo@317 60 Of the dynamic, secret based, authentication methods (\SMTP-after-\NAME{POP}, \SMTP\ authentication, and certificates) the first one drops out as it requires a \NAME{POP} server running on the same or a trusted host. \NAME{POP} servers are rare on workstations and home servers do also not regularly include them. Thus it is no option for \masqmail.
meillo@277 61
meillo@317 62 Authentication based on certificates does suffer from the certificate infrastructure that is required. Although certificates are already used for encryption, its management overhead prevented wide spread usage for authentication.
meillo@184 63
meillo@332 64 \SMTP\ authentication (also referred to as \NAME{SMTP-AUTH}) support is easiest received by using a \name{Simple Authentication and Security Layer} (short: \NAME{SASL}) implementation. \person{Dent} sees in \NAME{SASL} the best solution for dynamic authentication of users:
meillo@184 65 \begin{quote}
meillo@184 66 %None of these add-ons is an ideal solution. They require additional code compiled into your existing daemons that may then require special write accesss to system files. They also require additional work for busy system administrators. If you cannot use any of the nonauthenticating alternatives mentioned earlier, or your business requirements demand that all of your users' mail pass through your system no matter where they are on the Internet, SASL is probably the solution that offers the most reliable and scalable method to authenticate users.
meillo@332 67 None of these [authentication methods] is an ideal solution. They require additional code compiled into your existing daemons that may then require special write access to system files. They also require additional work for busy system administrators. If you cannot use any of the nonauthenticating alternatives mentioned earlier, or your business requirements demand that all of your users' mail pass through your system no matter where they are on the Internet, \NAME{SASL} is probably the solution that offers the most reliable and scalable method to authenticate users.
meillo@218 68 \hfill\cite[page 44]{dent04}
meillo@184 69 \end{quote}
meillo@184 70
meillo@324 71 These days is \NAME{SMTP-AUTH}, which is defined in \RFC\,2554, supported by most email clients. If encryption is used then even insecure authentication methods like \NAME{PLAIN} and \NAME{LOGIN} become secure.
meillo@277 72
meillo@324 73 \masqmail\ best uses an available \NAME{SASL} library. \name{Cyrus} \NAME{SASL} is used by \postfix\ and \sendmail. It is a complete framework that makes use of existing authentication concepts like \path{/etc/passwd} or \NAME{PAM}. As advantage it can be included in existing user data bases. \name{gsasl} is an alternative. It comes as a library which helps on deciding for a method and on generating the appropriate dialog data; the actual transmission of the data and the authentication against some database is left open to the programmer. \name{gsasl} is used by \name{msmtp} for example. It seems best to give both concepts a try and decide then which one to use.
meillo@317 74
meillo@332 75 Currently, outgoing connections already feature \SMTP-\NAME{AUTH} but only in a hand-coded way. It is to decide whether it remains as it is or gets replaced by the \NAME{SASL} approach, that is used for incoming connections. The decision should be based on the estimated time until the new design is usable.
meillo@324 76
meillo@324 77 Authentication needs code changes at the same places as encryption. The relevant code files are \path{smtp_in.c}, \path{smtp_out.c}, and \path{conf.c}.
meillo@324 78
meillo@324 79 The server code, to authenticate clients, must be added to \path{smtp_in.c} and the configuration options to \path{conf.c}. Several configuration options should be provided: the authentication policy (no authentication, offer authentication, insist on authentication), the authentication backend (if several are supported), an option to refuse plain text methods (\NAME{PLAIN} and \NAME{LOGIN}), and one to require encryption before authentication.
meillo@324 80
meillo@324 81 If the authentication code for outgoing connects shall be changed too, it must be done in \path{smtp_out.c}. The configuration options are already present.
meillo@324 82
meillo@324 83
meillo@332 84 About the authentication backend. For a small \MTA\ like \masqmail, it seems preferable to store the login data in a text file under \masqmail's control. This is the most simple choice for many usage scenarios. But using a central authentication facility has advantages in larger setups too. \name{Cyrus} \NAME{SASL} supports both, so there is no problem. If \name{gsasl} is chosen, it seems best to start with an authentication file under \masqmail's control.
meillo@324 85
meillo@324 86
meillo@324 87
meillo@317 88
meillo@317 89
meillo@317 90 << Compare static with dynamic authentication: pros and cons; usecases: when to use what; >>
meillo@317 91
meillo@317 92 << how could this be covered by architecture (e.g. smtp submission). >>
meillo@184 93
meillo@184 94
meillo@184 95
meillo@324 96
meillo@324 97
meillo@326 98 \subsection{Security}
meillo@184 99
meillo@324 100 Improvements to \masqmail's security are an important requirement and are the third task to work on. Retrofitting security \emph{into} \masqmail\ is not or hardly possible as it was explained in section \ref{sec:discussion-further-devel}. But adding wrappers and interposition filters can be a large step towards security.
meillo@324 101
meillo@324 102 At first mail security layers like \name{smap} come to mind. The market share analysis in section \ref{sec:market-share} identified such software. This is an interposition filter that stands between the untrusted network and the \MTA. It accepts mail in replacement for the \MTA\ (also called \name{proxy}) in order to separate the \MTA\ from the untrusted network.
meillo@324 103
meillo@324 104 The work \name{smap} does is described in \cite{cabral01}: \name{smap} accepts messages as proxy for the \MTA\ and puts it into a queue. \name{smapd} a brother program runs as daemon and watches for new messages in the queue which it submits into the \MTA\ then.
meillo@324 105
meillo@332 106 Because the \MTA\ does not listen for connections from outside now, it is not directly vulnerable. But the \MTA\ can not react on relaying and spam on itself anymore because it has no direct connection to the mail sender. This job needs to be covered by the proxy now. Similar is the situation for encryption and authentication. However, care must be taken that the proxy stays small and simple as its own security will suffer otherwise.
meillo@324 107
meillo@324 108 The advantage is that the \MTA\ itself needs not to bother much with untrusted environments. And a small proxy cares only about that work.
meillo@324 109
meillo@324 110 \name{smap} is non-free software and thus no general choice for \masqmail. A way to achieve a similar setup would be to copy \masqmail\ and strip one copy to the bare minimum what is needed for the proxy job. \name{setuid} could be removed and root privilege too if \name{inetd} is used. This hardens the proxy instance.
meillo@324 111
meillo@332 112 Mail from outside would then come through the proxy into the system. Mail from the local host and from the local network could be directly accepted by the normal \masqmail, if those locations are considered trusted. But it seems better to have them use the proxy too, or maybe a second proxy instance with different policy.
meillo@324 113
meillo@326 114 The here described setup comes close to the structure of the incoming channels in the new design which is described in \ref{sec:new-design}. This shows the possibilities of the here chosen approach. %fixme: rethink this sentence
meillo@184 115
meillo@184 116
meillo@326 117 \subsubsection*{A concrete setup}
meillo@184 118
meillo@326 119 A stripped down proxy needs to be created. It should only be able to receive mail via \SMTP, encrypt the communication, authenticate clients, and send mail out via \SMTP\ to an internal socket (named ``X'' in the figure). This is a straight forward task. The normal \masqmail\ instance runs on the system too. It takes input from \name{stdin} (by calling the \path{sendmail} command) and via \SMTP\ where it listens on an internal socket (named ``X'' in the figure). Outgoing mail is handled without difference to a regular setup. Figure \ref{fig:proxy-setup} depicts the setup.
meillo@317 120
meillo@326 121 \begin{figure}
meillo@326 122 \begin{center}
meillo@326 123 \includegraphics[scale=0.75]{img/proxy-setup.eps}
meillo@326 124 \end{center}
meillo@326 125 \caption{A setup with a proxy}
meillo@326 126 \label{fig:proxy-setup}
meillo@326 127 \end{figure}
meillo@288 128
meillo@246 129
meillo@298 130 \subsubsection*{Spam and malware handling}
meillo@277 131
meillo@332 132 The presented setup is the same as the one with two \MTA\ instances and a scanner application in between, which was suggested to add spam and malware scanner afterwards to an \MTA. This is a fortunate coincidence, because a scanner like \name{amavis} can simply be put in replace for the internal socket ``X''.
meillo@277 133
meillo@277 134
meillo@246 135
meillo@246 136
meillo@326 137 \subsubsection*{Conditional compilation}
meillo@326 138 << conditional compilation >>
meillo@326 139
meillo@326 140
meillo@326 141
meillo@246 142
meillo@246 143
meillo@246 144
meillo@246 145
meillo@246 146
meillo@246 147
meillo@246 148
meillo@246 149
meillo@246 150
meillo@246 151
meillo@246 152
meillo@246 153
meillo@246 154
meillo@246 155
meillo@285 156 \section{A new design}
meillo@326 157 \label{sec:new-design}
meillo@246 158
meillo@328 159 The last chapter identified the requirements for a modern and secure \masqmail. Now the various jobs of an \MTA\ get assigned to modules of which a new architecture is created. It is inspired by existing \MTA{}s and driven by the identified requirements.
meillo@246 160
meillo@249 161 One wise experience was kept in mind during the design: ``Many times in life, getting off to the right start makes all the difference.'' \cite[page~32]{graff03}.
meillo@246 162
meillo@246 163
meillo@328 164
meillo@328 165 \subsection{Design decisions}
meillo@328 166
meillo@331 167 This section describes and discusses architectural decision that were made for the new design. At some points function is of matter too, but it is mostly about architecture.
meillo@331 168
meillo@331 169 A number of major design ideas lead the development of the new architecture:
meillo@328 170 \begin{enumerate}
meillo@328 171 \item compartmentalization throughout
meillo@328 172 \item free the internal system from the in and out channels
meillo@328 173 \item provide interfaces to add arbitrary protocol handlers afterwards
meillo@328 174 \item have a single point where all mail goes through for scanning
meillo@328 175 \item concentrate on the mail transfer job; use specialized external programs for other jobs
meillo@328 176 \item keep it simple, clear, and general
meillo@328 177 \end{enumerate}
meillo@246 178
meillo@246 179
meillo@326 180
meillo@246 181 \subsubsection*{Incoming channels}
meillo@246 182
meillo@328 183 \sendmail-compatible \mta{}s must support at least two incoming channels: mail submitted using the \sendmail\ command, and mail received via the \SMTP\ daemon. It is therefore common to split the incoming channel into local and remote. This is done by \qmail\ and \postfix. The same way is \person{Hafiz}'s view \cite{hafiz05}. %fixme: specify page
meillo@246 184
meillo@328 185 In contrast is \name{sendmail X}: Its locally submitted messages go to the \SMTP\ daemon, which is the only connection towards the mail queue. %fixme: is it a smtp dialog? or a back door?
meillo@328 186 \person{Finch} proposes a similar approach. He wants the \texttt{sendmail} command to be a simple \SMTP\ client that contacts the \SMTP\ daemon of the \MTA\ like it is done by connections from remote. The advantage here is one single module where all \SMTP\ dialog with submitters is done. Hence one single point to accept or refuse incoming mail. Additionally does the module which puts mail into the queue not need to be \name{setuid} or \name{setgid} because it is only invoked from the \SMTP\ daemon. The \MTA's architecture would become simpler and common tasks are not duplicated in modules that do similar jobs.
meillo@246 187
meillo@332 188 But merging the input channels in the \SMTP\ daemon makes the \MTA\ heavily dependent on \SMTP. To \qmail\ and \postfix\ new modules to support other ways of message reception may be added without change of other parts of the system. Also the \SMTP\ modules can be removed if it is not needed. And it is better to have more independent modules if each one is simpler then---it makes the modules more complicated if each one needs to implement an \SMTP\ client.
meillo@246 189
meillo@332 190 With the increasing need for new protocols in mind, it seems better to have single modules for each incoming channel, although this leads to duplicated acceptance checks. Independent checks in different modules, however, have also the advantage to simply apply different policies. Thus it is possible to run two \SMTP\ modules that listen on different ports; one accessible from the Internet but requires authentication, the other only accessible from the local network but does not require authentication.
meillo@328 191
meillo@328 192 The approach of simple independent modules, one for each incoming channel, should be taken.
meillo@328 193
meillo@328 194 A module which is a \NAME{POP} or \NAME{IMAP} client to import contents of other mail boxes into the system may be added afterwards as it is desired.
meillo@328 195
meillo@246 196
meillo@246 197
meillo@246 198 \subsubsection*{Outgoing channels}
meillo@246 199
meillo@328 200 Outgoing mail is commonly either sent using \SMTP, piped into local commands (for example \path{uucp}), or delivered locally by appending to a mailbox.
meillo@246 201
meillo@328 202 Outgoing channels are similar for \qmail, \postfix, and \name{sendmail X}: All of them have a module to send mail using \SMTP, and one for writing into a local mailbox. Local mail delivery is a job that requires root privilege to be able to switch to any user in order to write to his mailbox. Modular \MTA{}s do not need \name{setuid root}, but the local delivery process (or its parent) needs to run as root\footnote{root privilege is actually not a mandatory requirement, but any other approach has some disadvantages, so commonly root privilege is used.}.
meillo@246 203
meillo@328 204 Local mail delivery should not be done by the \MTA, but by an \NAME{MDA}. This decision was discussed in section \ref{sec:functional-requirements}. This means only an outgoing channel that pipes mail into a local command is required for local delivery.
meillo@246 205
meillo@332 206 Other outgoing channels, one for each supported protocol, may be designed like it was done in other \MTA{}s.
meillo@246 207
meillo@246 208
meillo@246 209
meillo@328 210 \subsubsection*{The mail queue}
meillo@246 211
meillo@328 212 The mail queue is the central part of an \MTA. This demands especially for robustness and reliability as a failure here can lead to loosing mail.
meillo@246 213
meillo@328 214 %\sendmail, \exim, \qmail, \name{sendmail X}, and \masqmail\ feature one single mail queue. \postfix\ has more of them.
meillo@332 215 Common \MTA{}s feature one or more mail queues, they sometimes have effectively several queues within one physical representation.
meillo@246 216
meillo@328 217 \MTA\ setups that include content scanning tend to require two separate queues. To use \sendmail\ in such setups requires two independent instances with two separate queues. \exim\ can handle it with special \name{router} and \name{transport} rules but the data flow gets complicated. Hence an idea is to use two queues, \name{incoming} and \name{active} in \postfix's terminology, with the content scanning within the move from \name{incoming} to \name{active}.
meillo@246 218
meillo@328 219 \sendmail, \exim, \qmail, and \masqmail\ all use at least two files to store one message in the queue: one file contains the message body, another the envelope and header information. The one containing the mail body is not modified at all. \postfix\ takes a different approach in storing queued messages in an internal format within one file. \person{Finch} suggest yet another approach: storing the whole queue in one single file with pointers to separating positions \cite{finchFIXME}. %fixme: check, cite, and think about
meillo@246 220
meillo@328 221 All of the presented \MTA{}s use the file system to hold the queue; none uses a database to hold it. A database could improve the reliability of the queue through better persistence. This might be a choice for larger \MTA{}s but is none for \masqmail\ which should be kept small and simple. A running database system does likely require much more resources than \masqmail\ itself does. And as the queue's job is more storing data than running data selection queries, a database does not gain so much that it outweighs its costs.
meillo@246 222
meillo@328 223 Hence here the choice is having a directory with simple text files in it. This is straight forward, simple, clear, and general \dots\ and thus a good basis for reliability. It is additionally always of advantage if data is stored in the operation system's natural form, which in the case of \unix\ is plain text.
meillo@298 224
meillo@328 225 Robustness for the queue is covered in the next section. %fixme: ist this sentence neccessary? Is it still correct.
meillo@246 226
meillo@246 227
meillo@328 228
meillo@328 229 \subsubsection*{Mail sanitizing}
meillo@328 230
meillo@328 231 Mail coming into the system may be may be malformed, lacking headers, or be an attempt to exploit the system. Care must be taken.
meillo@328 232
meillo@328 233 In \postfix, this is done by the \name{cleanup} module, which invokes \name{rewrite}. The position in the message flow is after the message comes from one of the several incoming channels and before the message is stored into the \name{incoming} queue. \name{cleanup} does a complete check to make the mail header complete and valid.
meillo@328 234
meillo@332 235 \qmail\ has the principle of ``don't parse'' which propagates the avoidance of parsing as possible in the system. The reason is that parsing is a highly complex task which often makes code exploitable.
meillo@328 236
meillo@328 237 Mail should be stored into the queue as it is in \masqmail's new design. A scanning module should then parse the message with high care. It seems best to use a \name{parser generator} for this work. The parsed data should then be modified if needed and written into a second queue. This approach has several advantages. First, the receiving parts of the system do not bother about content, they simply store it into the queue. Second, one single modules does the parsing and generates new messages that contain only valid data. Third, the sending parts of the system will only work on messages that consist of valid data. Of course it must be ensured that each message passes through the \name{scanning} module, but this is required for spam and malware scanning too.
meillo@328 238
meillo@328 239 The mail body will never get modified, except of removing and adding transfer protocol specific requirements like dot stuffing or special line ending characters.
meillo@328 240
meillo@328 241 \person{Jon Postel}'s robustness principle ``Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send.'', which can be found in this wording in \RFC\,1122 and in different wordings in numerous \RFC{}s, is respected in the \name{scanning} module. It parses the given input in some liberal way and generates clean output. \person{Raymond}'s \name{Rule of Repair} ``Repair what you can -- but when you must fail, fail noisily and as soon as possible.'' can be applied too. But it is important to repair only obvious problems, because repairing functionality is likely a target of attacks.
meillo@328 242
meillo@328 243
meillo@246 244
meillo@246 245
meillo@246 246 \subsubsection*{Aliasing}
meillo@246 247
meillo@328 248 The main question about aliasing is: Where should aliases get expanded?
meillo@246 249
meillo@332 250 Two facts are important to consider: Addresses expanding to lists of users lead to more envelopes. And aliases changing the recipient's domain part may make the message unsuitable for a specific online route.
meillo@328 251
meillo@332 252 Aliasing is often handled in expanding the alias and re-injecting the mail into the system. Unfortunately, the mail is processed twice then; additionally does the system have to handle more mail this way. If it is wanted to check the new recipient address for acceptance and do all processing again, then re-injecting it is the best choice. But already accepted messages may get rejected in the second go, because of an replacement address from within the system. This seems not to be wanted.
meillo@328 253
meillo@328 254 Doing the alias expansion in the scanning module appears to be the best solution. Unfortunately a second alias expansion must be made on delivery, because only at that point in time is clear which route is used for the message. This compromise is accepted.
meillo@246 255
meillo@246 256
meillo@246 257
meillo@287 258 \subsubsection*{Route management}
meillo@246 259
meillo@328 260 The online state is only important for the sending modules of the system, thus it should be queried in the \name{queue-out} module which selects ready messages from the \name{outgoing} queue and transfers them to the appropriate sending module. Route-based aliasing, which was described in the last section, %fixme: is this still true?
meillo@328 261 should to be done in the same go.
meillo@246 262
meillo@246 263
meillo@246 264
meillo@246 265 \subsubsection*{Archiving}
meillo@89 266
meillo@328 267 The best point to archive copies of every incoming mail is the \name{queue-in} module, respectively the \name{queue-out} module for copies outgoing mail. But not respected with this approach are the changes that are made by the receiving modules (adding further headers) and sending modules (address rewrites).
meillo@194 268
meillo@328 269 \qmail\ has the ability to log complete \SMTP\ dialogs. Logging the complete data transaction into and out of the system into a separate log file is a great feature which should be implemented into each receiving and sending module. But as it will produce a huge amount of output, it should be cared to disabled it by default.
meillo@194 270
meillo@194 271
meillo@194 272
meillo@194 273
meillo@89 274
meillo@332 275 \subsubsection*{Authentication and Encryption}
meillo@332 276
meillo@332 277 Both topics were discussed several time throughout this thesis, among other places on page \pageref{} and \pageref{}.
meillo@332 278
meillo@332 279 Authentication should be done within the receiving modules. Similar should authentication for outgoing connections be handled by the sending modules. To encryption applies the same as to authentication here. Only receiving and sending modules should come in contact with it.
meillo@332 280
meillo@332 281 In order to avoid code duplicates, the actual implementation of both functions should be provided by a central source which gets invoked by the various modules.
meillo@332 282
meillo@332 283
meillo@332 284
meillo@332 285
meillo@332 286
meillo@332 287
meillo@332 288 \subsubsection*{Spam and malware handling}
meillo@332 289
meillo@332 290 The two approaches for spam handling were already presented to the reader in section \ref{}. Here they are described in more detail:
meillo@332 291
meillo@332 292 \begin{enumerate}
meillo@332 293 \item Refusing spam during the \SMTP\ dialog. This is the way it was meant by the designers of the \SMTP\ protocol. They thought checking the sender and recipient mail addresses would be enough, but as they are forgeable it is not. More and more complex checks need to be done. Checking needs time, but \SMTP\ dialogs time out if it takes too long. Thus only limited time can be used, during the \SMTP\ dialog, for checking if a message seems to be spam. The advantage is that acceptance of bad messages can be simply refused---no responsibility for the message is taken and no further system load is added. See \RFC2505 (especially section 1.5) for detail.
meillo@332 294
meillo@332 295 \item Checking for spam after the mail was accepted and queued. Here more processing time can be invested, so more detailed checks can be done. But, as responsibility for messages was taken by accepting them, it is no choice to simply delete spam mail. Checks for spam do not lead to sure results, they just indicate the possibility the message is unwanted mail. \person{Eisentraut} indicates actions to take after a message is recognized as probably spam \cite[pages 18--20]{eisentraut05}. The only acceptable one, for mail the \MTA\ is responsible for, is adding further or rewriting existent header lines. Thus all further work on the message is the same as for non-spam messages.
meillo@332 296 \end{enumerate}
meillo@332 297
meillo@332 298 Modern \MTA{}s use both techniques in combination. Checks during the \SMTP\ dialog tend to be implemented in the \mta\ to make it fast; checks after the message was queued are often done using external programs (\name{spamassassin} is a well known one). \person{Eisentraut} sees the checks during the \SMTP\ dialog to be essential: ``Ganz ohne Analyse w\"ahrend der \SMTP-Phase kommt sowieso kein \MTA\ aus, und es ist eine Frage der Einsch\"atzung, wie weit man diese Phase belasten m\"ochte.'' \cite[page 25]{eisentraut05} (translated: ``No \MTA\ can go without analysis during the \SMTP\ phase anyway, but the amount of stress one likes to put on this phase is left to his discretion.'')
meillo@332 299
meillo@332 300 Checking before a message is accepted, like \NAME{DNS} blacklists and \name{greylisting}, needs to be invoked from within the receiving modules. Like for authentication and encryption, the implementation of the functionality should be provided by a central source.
meillo@332 301
meillo@332 302 All checking after the message was queued should be done by pushing the message through external scanners like \name{spamassassin}. The \name{scanning} module is the best place to handle this. Hence this module needs interfaces to external scanners.
meillo@332 303
meillo@332 304
meillo@332 305 Malware scanning is similar like the second type of spam scanning. The \name{amavis} framework is a popular mail scanning framework that includes all kinds of malware and also spam scanners; it communicates by using \SMTP.
meillo@332 306
meillo@332 307 Providing \SMTP\ in and out channels from the \name{scanning} module to external scanner applications seems to be a desired goal. Using further instances of the already available \name{smtp} and \name{smtpd} modules therefore appears to be the best solution.
meillo@332 308
meillo@332 309
meillo@332 310
meillo@332 311 \subsubsection*{The scanning module}
meillo@332 312
meillo@332 313 A lot of work was put onto the \name{scanning} module. This is not what is desired. Thus splitting it up into single parts appears to be necessary. But the decision how to split is left up to the time of prototyping.
meillo@332 314
meillo@332 315 << fixme >> %fixme
meillo@332 316
meillo@332 317
meillo@332 318
meillo@332 319
meillo@89 320
meillo@175 321
meillo@326 322
meillo@326 323
meillo@326 324
meillo@326 325
meillo@326 326
meillo@326 327
meillo@246 328
meillo@246 329 \subsection{The resulting architecture}
meillo@246 330
meillo@333 331 The result is a symmetric design, featuring the following parts: Any number of handlers for incoming connections to receive mail. A module that stores the received mail into the incoming queue. A central scanning module take mail from the incoming queue, processes it in various ways, and puts it afterwards into the outgoing queue. A module that takes it out of the outgoing queue and passes it to a matching transport module. A set of transport modules that transfers the message to the destination. In other words three main modules (queue-in, scanning, queue-out) are connected by two queues (incoming, outgoing). On each end are more modules to receive or send mail---one for each protocol. The \name{pool} is the place where the bodies of the queued messages are stored. Figure \ref{fig:masqmail-arch-new} depicts the new designed architecture.
meillo@246 332
meillo@246 333 \begin{figure}
meillo@246 334 \begin{center}
meillo@246 335 \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{img/masqmail-arch-new.eps}
meillo@246 336 \end{center}
meillo@246 337 \caption{A new designed architecture for \masqmail}
meillo@246 338 \label{fig:masqmail-arch-new}
meillo@246 339 \end{figure}
meillo@246 340
meillo@333 341 This architecture is heavily influenced by the ones of \qmail\ and \postfix. Both have different incoming channels that merge in the module that puts mail into the queue; central is the queue (or more of them); and one module takes mail from the queue and passes it to one of the outgoing channels. Mail processing is built into the architecture in a more explicit way than it was done in \qmail\ and \postfix. It is more similar to the \NAME{AR} module of \name{sendmail X}, which is the central point for spam checking.
meillo@246 342
meillo@246 343 Special regard was put on addable support for further mail transfer protocols. This appears to be most similar to \qmail, which was designed to handle multiple protocols.
meillo@246 344 %fixme: do i need all this ``quesses''??
meillo@246 345
meillo@246 346
meillo@246 347 \subsubsection*{Modules and queues}
meillo@246 348
meillo@333 349 The new architecture consists of several modules and two queues plus a data pool. They are described in more detail now. First the three main modules, then the queues, and afterwards the modules for incoming and outgoing transfer.
meillo@246 350
meillo@246 351
meillo@333 352 The \name{queue-in} module creates new spool files in the \name{incoming} queue and in the message \name{pool} for incoming messages. It is a process running in background, waiting for connections from one of the receiver modules. When one of them is receiving a new message, it connects to the \name{queue-in} module which creates a spool file in the \name{incoming} queue and a message body file in the \name{pool} and returns success. The receiver module then sends the envelope, the message header, and the message body. The first two get written into the spool file by \name{queue-in}, the latter is stored into the \name{pool}. If all went well another positive result is returned.
meillo@246 353 %fixme: should be no daemon
meillo@246 354
meillo@246 355
meillo@333 356 The \name{scanning} module is the central part of the system. It reads spooled messages from the \name{incoming} queue, works on the data, and writes new spool files to the \name{outgoing} queue. Then the message is removed from the \name{incoming} queue. The main job of this module is the processing of the message. Headers are fixed and missing ones are added if necessary, aliasing is done, and external processing of any kind is triggered. The \name{scanning} module can run in background and look for new mail in regular intervals or signals may be sent to it by \name{queue-in}. Alternatively it can be called by \name{cron} to do single runs. The \name{scanning} module work on the spool files primary but may read the mail body from the \name{pool} if necessary.
meillo@246 357
meillo@246 358
meillo@333 359 The \name{queue-out} module takes messages from the \name{outgoing} queue, queries information about the online state which specifies the route to use, and passes the messages to the correct transport module. Successfully transferred messages are removed from the \name{outgoing} queue. This module handles the \masqmail\ specific task of the route management.
meillo@246 360
meillo@246 361
meillo@333 362 The \name{incoming} queue stores envelope and the message header of messages received via one of the incoming channels. The data is in unprocessed form.
meillo@246 363
meillo@333 364 The \name{outgoing} queue contains processed data. The header and envelope information is complete and in valid form.
meillo@246 365
meillo@333 366 The \name{pool} is the storage of the message bodies of queued messages. This data is not changed within the \MTA, it is written on reception and read on dispatch.
meillo@246 367
meillo@282 368
meillo@333 369 \name{Receiver modules} are the communication interface between external senders and the \name{queue-in} module. Each protocol needs a corresponding \name{receiver module} to be supported. Most popular are the \name{sendmail} module which is a command to be called from the local host and the \name{smtpd} module which listens on port 25. Other modules to support other protocols may be added as needed. Receiving modules that need to listen on ports should get invoked by \name{inetd} or a more secure replacement like \person{Bernstein}'s \name{ucspi-tcp}. This makes it possible to run them with least privilege.
meillo@246 370
meillo@333 371 \name{Transport modules}, on the opposite side of the system, are the modules to send outgoing mail. They are the interface between \name{queue-out} and remote hosts or local commands for further processing. The most popular ones are the \name{smtp} module which acts as the \SMTP\ client and the \name{pipe} module to interface gateways to other systems or networks, like fax or \NAME{UUCP}. A module for local delivery is not included, \masqmail\ passes this job to the \NAME{MDA} (see section \ref{sec:functional-requirements} for reasons). Thus a \name{mail delivery agent} (like \name{procmail}) is to be used with the \name{pipe} module.
meillo@246 372
meillo@246 373
meillo@246 374
meillo@246 375 \subsubsection*{Inter-module communication}
meillo@246 376
meillo@330 377 Communication between modules is required to exchange data and status information. This is also called ``Inter-process communication'' (short: \NAME{IPC}) because the modules are independent programs in this case and processes are programs in execution.
meillo@246 378
meillo@332 379 The connections between \name{queue-in} and \name{scanning}, as well as between \name{scanning} and \name{queue-out} is provided by the queues, only sending signals to trigger runs may be useful. Communication between receiving and transport modules and the outside world are done using the specific protocol they do handle.
meillo@246 380
meillo@330 381 Left is only communication between the receiver modules and \name{queue-in}, and between \name{queue-out} and the transport modules. Data is exchanged using \unix\ pipes and a simple protocol. Figure \ref{fig:ipc-protocol} shows a state diagram for the protocol. Solid lines indicate client actions, dashed lines indicate server responses.
meillo@246 382
meillo@246 383 \begin{figure}
meillo@246 384 \begin{center}
meillo@330 385 \includegraphics[scale=0.75]{img/ipc-protocol.eps}
meillo@246 386 \end{center}
meillo@330 387 \caption{State diagram of the \NAME{IPC} protocol}
meillo@246 388 \label{fig:ipc-protocol}
meillo@246 389 \end{figure}
meillo@246 390
meillo@330 391 \paragraph{Timing}
meillo@330 392 One dialog consists of exactly three phases: connection attempt, envelope and header transfer, and transfer of the message body. The order is always the same. The three phases are all initiated by the client process; after each phase the server process sends a success or error reply. Timeouts for each phase need to be implemented.
meillo@246 393
meillo@330 394 \paragraph{Semantics}
meillo@330 395 The connection attempt is simply opening the connection. This starts the dialog. A positive reply by the server leads to the transfer of envelope and message header. If the server again sends a positive reply, the message data is transferred too. A last server reply ends the dialog.
meillo@246 396
meillo@332 397 The client indicates the end of each data transfer with a special terminator sequence. The appearance of this terminator sequence tells the server process that the data transfer is complete and makes the server send a reply. The server process takes responsibility of the data in sending a success reply. A failure reply immediately stops the dialog and resets both client and server to the state before the connection attempt.
meillo@246 398
meillo@330 399 \paragraph{Syntax}
meillo@333 400 Data transfer is done by sending plain text data. \name{Line Feed}---the native line separator on \unix---is used as line separator. The terminator sequence used to indicate the end of the data transfer is the \NAME{ASCII} \name{null} character (`\texttt{\textbackslash0}'). Replies are one-digit numbers with `\texttt{0}' meaning success and any other number (`\texttt{1}'--`\texttt{9}') indicate failure.
meillo@246 401
meillo@246 402
meillo@246 403
meillo@333 404 \subsubsection*{The queue}
meillo@246 405
meillo@333 406 The queue consists of three directories within the queue path. Two, named \name{incoming} and \name{outgoing}, for storing the spool files; one, called \name{pool}, to store the data files. The files being part of one message share the same unique name. The spool file's internal structure can remain the same as the one of current \masqmail. A queued message is represented by a spool file in \name{incoming} or \name{outgoing} and a data file in the \name{pool}.
meillo@246 407
meillo@333 408 The spool file owner's executable bit shows if the file is ready for further processing: The module that writes the file into the queue sets the bit as last action. Modules that read from the queue can process messages that have the bit set. This approach is derived from \postfix.
meillo@246 409
meillo@246 410
meillo@333 411 The spool file format is basically the same as the one in current \masqmail: one file for the envelope and message header information (it is called ``spool file'' here), a second file for the message body (called ``data file'').
meillo@246 412
meillo@333 413 The data file is stored in a separate data pool. It is written by \name{queue-in}; \name{scanning} can read it if necessary; \name{queue-out} reads it to generate the outgoing message and deletes it after successful transfer. Data files do not change at all within the system. They are written in default local plain text format. Required translation is done in the receiver and transport modules.
meillo@246 414
meillo@333 415 The spool file is written into the \name{incoming} queue. The \name{scanning} modules reads it, processes it, and writes a new one into the \name{outgoing} queue; the file in \name{incoming} is deleted then. \name{queue-out} finally takes the spool file from \name{outgoing} and the data file from the \name{pool} to generate the resulting message.
meillo@246 416
meillo@333 417 %This data flow is shown in figure \ref{fig:queue-data-flow}.
meillo@333 418 %
meillo@333 419 %\begin{figure}
meillo@333 420 % \begin{center}
meillo@333 421 % %\input{img/queue-data-flow.eps}
meillo@333 422 % \end{center}
meillo@333 423 % \caption{Data flow of messages in the queue}
meillo@333 424 % \label{fig:queue-data-flow}
meillo@333 425 %\end{figure}
meillo@246 426
meillo@246 427
meillo@333 428 A sample spool file. With comments in parenthesis.
meillo@333 429 \codeinput{input/sample-spool-file.txt}
meillo@246 430
meillo@246 431
meillo@246 432
meillo@246 433
meillo@246 434 \subsubsection*{Rights and permission}
meillo@246 435
meillo@246 436 The user set required for \qmail\ seems to be too complex. One special user, like \postfix\ uses, is more appropriate. \name{root} privilege and \name{setuid} permission is avoided as much as possible.
meillo@246 437
meillo@273 438 Table \ref{tab:new-masqmail-permissions} shows the suggested ownership and permissions of the modules.
meillo@246 439
meillo@246 440 \begin{table}
meillo@246 441 \begin{center}
meillo@271 442 \input{tbl/new-masqmail-permissions.tbl}
meillo@246 443 \end{center}
meillo@246 444 \caption{Ownership and permissions of the modules}
meillo@246 445 \label{tab:new-masqmail-permission}
meillo@246 446 \end{table}
meillo@246 447
meillo@273 448 These are the permissions and ownership used for the queue:
meillo@273 449 \codeinput{input/new-masqmail-queue.txt}
meillo@246 450
meillo@246 451
meillo@246 452
meillo@246 453
meillo@246 454
meillo@246 455 setuid/setgid or not?
meillo@246 456
meillo@246 457 what can crash if an attacker succeeds?
meillo@246 458
meillo@332 459 where to drop privilege?
meillo@246 460
meillo@246 461 how is which process invoked?
meillo@246 462
meillo@246 463 master process? needed, or wanted?
meillo@246 464
meillo@246 465 which are the daemon processes?
meillo@246 466
meillo@246 467
meillo@246 468
meillo@246 469
meillo@246 470
meillo@246 471
meillo@246 472
meillo@246 473 http://fanf.livejournal.com/50917.html %how not to design an mta - the sendmail command
meillo@246 474 http://fanf.livejournal.com/51349.html %how not to design an mta - partitioning for security
meillo@246 475 http://fanf.livejournal.com/61132.html %how not to design an mta - local delivery
meillo@246 476 http://fanf.livejournal.com/64941.html %how not to design an mta - spool file format
meillo@246 477 http://fanf.livejournal.com/65203.html %how not to design an mta - spool file logistics
meillo@246 478 http://fanf.livejournal.com/65911.html %how not to design an mta - more about log-structured MTA queues
meillo@246 479 http://fanf.livejournal.com/67297.html %how not to design an mta - more log-structured MTA queues
meillo@246 480 http://fanf.livejournal.com/70432.html %how not to design an mta - address verification
meillo@246 481 http://fanf.livejournal.com/72258.html %how not to design an mta - content scanning
meillo@246 482
meillo@246 483
meillo@246 484