Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Simple and easy MTA for 2.3.1?

    pfSense Packages
    3
    6
    2.0k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • M
      mrpsycho
      last edited by

      Hello,

      I have been using exim under pfsense <2.3… but, 2 days ago my pfsense totally broke and i reinstalled it to the new version.
      and was surprised, that now```
      pkg

      
      so, question is: what do you recommend?
      
      I was using MTA on pfSense for alerts from internal network as open relay.
      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • jimpJ
        jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
        last edited by

        We recommend not running an MTA on the firewall.  ;D

        Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

        Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

        Do not Chat/PM for help!

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • G
          G.D. Wusser Esq.
          last edited by

          @jimp:

          We recommend not running an MTA on the firewall.  ;D

          What is the logic behind the recommendation? If a bunch of spam can be cut down right at the perimeter, why not?

          What else do you not recommend running on the firewall: IDS/IPS, DNS?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • jimpJ
            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
            last edited by

            The logic is, as always: For best practices and higher security, we recommend keeping the services on the firewall to a minimum – doubly so for public services.

            MTA with spam filtering tacked on are huge, complex, beasts that have a history of security issues, and they are less suited to being at the perimeter of the network. You can route mail wherever you want, so route it to a dedicated mail filtering VM/appliance if you must. It doesn't have to be at the edge like an IDS.

            DNS services are less clear. A caching resolver for clients is good, but a public authoritative server is not.

            So basically, anything you can run elsewhere, should be run elsewhere, if you have a choice.

            And just because we have a package for something doesn't always mean it's a good idea to run it on an edge firewall. Classic security vs convenience trade-off.

            Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

            Do not Chat/PM for help!

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • G
              G.D. Wusser Esq.
              last edited by

              Thank you for the detailed explanation. I appreciate your effort.

              What follows are some theoretical ramblings on the subject.

              Grass always seems greener on the other side. It seems like virtualizing everything is a safer way to go, but on my recent memory there have been two serious hypervisor breakout vulnerabilities.

              In the cloud space, these days, lightweight Docker containers are all the rage. This is a technology that is loosely based on FreeBSD Jails. Perhaps, if pfSense packages were running inside the jails it would help to thwart some of the security risks; by stopping heap memory corruption attacks from affecting the whole system, for example.

              Ok. Thank you for reading. I am off to build a rack of servers. See you later.  :)

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • M
                mrpsycho
                last edited by

                moving up topic.

                maybe someone has solution?

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • First post
                  Last post
                Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.