August 2018 - dovecot

OCSP Stapling and Certificate Transparency
by Felipe Gasper 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Hi, For CAs that do not include a signed certificate timestamp in their newly-issued certificates, does Dovecot support either OCSP stapling or the Certificate Transparency TLS extension? If the TLS extension is supported, how does the admin configure the timestamp for each certificate? I’m wondering if any MUAs will follow Google’s lead and insist on CT. Thank you! -Felipe Gasper Mississauga, Ontario

4 3

Re: [ceph-users] dovecot + cephfs - sdbox vs mdbox
by Webert de Souza Lima 04 Oct '18

04 Oct '18

Thanks Jack. That's good to know. It is definitely something to consider. In a distributed storage scenario we might build a dedicated pool for that and tune the pool as more capacity or performance is needed. Regards, Webert Lima DevOps Engineer at MAV Tecnologia *Belo Horizonte - Brasil* *IRC NICK - WebertRLZ* On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:45 PM Jack <ceph(a)jack.fr.eu.org> wrote: > On 05/16/2018 09:35 PM, Webert de Souza Lima wrote: > > We'll soon do benchmarks of sdbox vs mdbox over cephfs with bluestore > > backend. > > We'll have to do some some work on how to simulate user traffic, for > writes > > and readings. That seems troublesome. > I would appreciate seeing these results ! > > > Thanks for the plugins recommendations. I'll take the change and ask you > > how is the SIS status? We have used it in the past and we've had some > > problems with it. > > I am using it since Dec 2016 with mdbox, with no issue at all (I am > currently using Dovecot 2.2.27-3 from Debian Stretch) > The only config I use is mail_attachment_dir, the rest lies as default > (mail_attachment_min_size = 128k, mail_attachment_fs = sis posix, > ail_attachment_hash = %{sha1}) > The backend storage is a local filesystem, and there is only one Dovecot > instance > > > > > Regards, > > > > Webert Lima > > DevOps Engineer at MAV Tecnologia > > *Belo Horizonte - Brasil* > > *IRC NICK - WebertRLZ* > > > > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:19 PM Jack <ceph(a)jack.fr.eu.org> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Many (most ?) filesystems does not store multiple files on the same > block > >> > >> Thus, with sdbox, every single mail (you know, that kind of mail with 10 > >> lines in it) will eat an inode, and a block (4k here) > >> mdbox is more compact on this way > >> > >> Another difference: sdbox removes the message, mdbox does not : a single > >> metadata update is performed, which may be packed with others if many > >> files are deleted at once > >> > >> That said, I do not have experience with dovecot + cephfs, nor have made > >> tests for sdbox vs mdbox > >> > >> However, and this is a bit out of topic, I recommend you look at the > >> following dovecot's features (if not already done), as they are awesome > >> and will help you a lot: > >> - Compression (classic, https://wiki.dovecot.org/Plugins/Zlib) > >> - Single-Instance-Storage (aka sis, aka "attachment deduplication" : > >> https://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2013-December/094276.html) > >> > >> Regards, > >> On 05/16/2018 08:37 PM, Webert de Souza Lima wrote: > >>> I'm sending this message to both dovecot and ceph-users ML so please > >> don't > >>> mind if something seems too obvious for you. > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I have a question for both dovecot and ceph lists and below I'll > explain > >>> what's going on. > >>> > >>> Regarding dbox format (https://wiki2.dovecot.org/MailboxFormat/dbox), > >> when > >>> using sdbox, a new file is stored for each email message. > >>> When using mdbox, multiple messages are appended to a single file until > >> it > >>> reaches/passes the rotate limit. > >>> > >>> I would like to understand better how the mdbox format impacts on IO > >>> performance. > >>> I think it's generally expected that fewer larger file translate to > less > >> IO > >>> and more troughput when compared to more small files, but how does > >> dovecot > >>> handle that with mdbox? > >>> If dovecot does flush data to storage upon each and every new email is > >>> arrived and appended to the corresponding file, would that mean that it > >>> generate the same ammount of IO as it would do with one file per > message? > >>> Also, if using mdbox many messages will be appended to a said file > >> before a > >>> new file is created. That should mean that a file descriptor is kept > open > >>> for sometime by dovecot process. > >>> Using cephfs as backend, how would this impact cluster performance > >>> regarding MDS caps and inodes cached when files from thousands of users > >> are > >>> opened and appended all over? > >>> > >>> I would like to understand this better. > >>> > >>> Why? > >>> We are a small Business Email Hosting provider with bare metal, self > >> hosted > >>> systems, using dovecot for servicing mailboxes and cephfs for email > >> storage. > >>> > >>> We are currently working on dovecot and storage redesign to be in > >>> production ASAP. The main objective is to serve more users with better > >>> performance, high availability and scalability. > >>> * high availability and load balancing is extremely important to us * > >>> > >>> On our current model, we're using mdbox format with dovecot, having > >>> dovecot's INDEXes stored in a replicated pool of SSDs, and messages > >> stored > >>> in a replicated pool of HDDs (under a Cache Tier with a pool of SSDs). > >>> All using cephfs / filestore backend. > >>> > >>> Currently there are 3 clusters running dovecot 2.2.34 and ceph Jewel > >>> (10.2.9-4). > >>> - ~25K users from a few thousands of domains per cluster > >>> - ~25TB of email data per cluster > >>> - ~70GB of dovecot INDEX [meta]data per cluster > >>> - ~100MB of cephfs metadata per cluster > >>> > >>> Our goal is to build a single ceph cluster for storage that could > expand > >> in > >>> capacity, be highly available and perform well enough. I know, that's > >> what > >>> everyone wants. > >>> > >>> Cephfs is an important choise because: > >>> - there can be multiple mountpoints, thus multiple dovecot instances > on > >>> different hosts > >>> - the same storage backend is used for all dovecot instances > >>> - no need of sharding domains > >>> - dovecot is easily load balanced (with director sticking users to the > >>> same dovecot backend) > >>> > >>> On the upcoming upgrade we intent to: > >>> - upgrade ceph to 12.X (Luminous) > >>> - drop the SSD Cache Tier (because it's deprecated) > >>> - use bluestore engine > >>> > >>> I was said on freenode/#dovecot that there are many cases where SDBOX > >> would > >>> perform better with NFS sharing. > >>> In case of cephfs, at first, I wouldn't think that would be true > because > >>> more files == more generated IO, but thinking about what I said in the > >>> beginning regarding sdbox vs mdbox that could be wrong. > >>> > >>> Any thoughts will be highlt appreciated. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> > >>> Webert Lima > >>> DevOps Engineer at MAV Tecnologia > >>> *Belo Horizonte - Brasil* > >>> *IRC NICK - WebertRLZ* > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> ceph-users mailing list > >>> ceph-users(a)lists.ceph.com > >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ceph-users mailing list > >> ceph-users(a)lists.ceph.com > >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > >> > > > >

1 1

Re: Dovecot User Listing Error - getpwent() failed: Invalid Argument
by Reuben Farrelly 04 Oct '18

04 Oct '18

Sure: https://www.reub.net/files/dovecot/lightning-dovecot.conf https://www.reub.net/files/dovecot/thunderstorm-dovecot.conf Updated nightly. Reuben On 1/09/2018 12:26 am, Aki Tuomi wrote: > Can you provide doveconf -n? > > > > --- > Aki Tuomi > Dovecot oy > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Reuben Farrelly <reuben-dovecot(a)reub.net> > Date: 31/08/2018 17:12 (GMT+02:00) > To: Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi(a)dovecot.fi>, Dovecot Mailing List > <dovecot(a)dovecot.org> > Subject: Re: Dovecot User Listing Error - getpwent() failed: Invalid > Argument > > No. Neither of those are installed on either system. > > Reuben > > On 1/09/2018 12:09 am, Aki Tuomi wrote: > > Could apparmor or selinux be causing this! > > > > > > > > --- > > Aki Tuomi > > Dovecot oy > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Reuben Farrelly <reuben-dovecot(a)reub.net> > > Date: 31/08/2018 16:50 (GMT+02:00) > > To: Dovecot Mailing List <dovecot(a)dovecot.org> > > Subject: Dovecot User Listing Error - getpwent() failed: Invalid Argument > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm running dovecot-2.3 git and seeing on 2 of my Dovecot installations, > > the following message logged quite frequently: > > > > Aug 31 16:55:53 lightning.reub.net dovecot[7698]: auth-worker(7707): > > Error: getpwent() failed: Invalid argument > > Aug 31 16:55:53 lightning.reub.net dovecot[7698]: replicator: Error: > > User listing returned failure > > Aug 31 16:55:53 lightning.reub.net dovecot[7698]: replicator: Error: > > listing users failed, can't replicate existing data > > > > It appears that this could be having an effect on replication, but it's > > unclear because the secondary/replica doesn't see much traffic. > > > > Authentication is via PAM and the system is Gentoo Linux x86_64. passb > > driver = pam, userdb driver = static . > > > > doveadm user -u '*' shows the system users listed twice like this (is > > this a problem?) and then prints: > > > > ---- > > reuben > > liam > > reuben > > liam > > <some other users> > > Error: User listing returned failure > > Fatal: user listing failed > > ---- > > > > To me that doesn't look right. > > > > Can anyone suggest what could be causing this? I don't recall seeing > > this message some time ago so I suspect it's a recent change in either > > dovecot, or pam or glibc etc.. > > > > Thanks, > > Reuben

2 10

Nightly builds of Debian packages
by Christoph Pleger 24 Sep '18

24 Sep '18

Hello, how is the future of the automatically built nightly debian packages of dovecot? Has that project been ceased? The current auto-built version is still 2.2.28 from April 28, though 2.2.29 (with a security patch) of dovecot is out now for a while. Regards Christoph

4 3

Re: Duplicate mails on pop3 expunge with dsync replication on 2.2.35 (2.2.33.2 works)
by Gerald Galster 21 Sep '18

21 Sep '18

Hi Tim, > Do you have any new insights on the problem with reappearing mail using dovecot replication + pop3? > > It's driving me mad. I'm running dovecot 2.2.34 (874deae) on OpenBSD and it looks like I have the same problem as you have. unfortunately there has been no response, I'm stuck with 2.2.33.2 for the time being. I can only suspect it has something to do with mailbox locking which was introduced in 2.2.34 (int dsync_mailbox_lock) or maybe with some cached values (drop_older_timestamp) as it just happens when the mail is deleted on the node that it has been synced to but not if it's deleted on the node where it has originally been received. Best regards, Gerald diff -Nru dovecot-2.2.33.2/src/doveadm/dsync/dsync-brain-mailbox.c dovecot-2.2.34/src/doveadm/dsync/dsync-brain-mailbox.c --- dovecot-2.2.33.2/src/doveadm/dsync/dsync-brain-mailbox.c 2017-10-05 19:10:44.000000000 +0200 +++ dovecot-2.2.34/src/doveadm/dsync/dsync-brain-mailbox.c 2018-02-28 15:45:34.000000000 +0100 @@ -522,25 +529,33 @@ } /* mailbox appears to have changed. do a full sync here and get the - state again */ + state again. Lock before syncing. */ + if (dsync_mailbox_lock(brain, box, &lock) < 0) { + brain->failed = TRUE; + mailbox_free(&box); + return -1; + } if (mailbox_sync(box, MAILBOX_SYNC_FLAG_FULL_READ) < 0) { i_error("Can't sync mailbox %s: %s", mailbox_get_vname(box), mailbox_get_last_internal_error(box, &brain->mail_error)); ... @@ -599,6 +615,7 @@ static void dsync_cache_fields_update(const struct dsync_mailbox *local_box, const struct dsync_mailbox *remote_box, + struct mailbox *box, struct mailbox_update *update) { ARRAY_TYPE(mailbox_cache_field) local_sorted, remote_sorted, changes; @@ -630,7 +647,8 @@ local_fields = array_get(&local_sorted, &local_count); remote_fields = array_get(&remote_sorted, &remote_count); t_array_init(&changes, local_count + remote_count); - drop_older_timestamp = ioloop_time - MAIL_CACHE_FIELD_DROP_SECS; + drop_older_timestamp = ioloop_time - + box->index->optimization_set.cache.unaccessed_field_drop_secs; diff -Nru dovecot-2.2.33.2/src/doveadm/dsync/dsync-mailbox.c dovecot-2.2.34/src/doveadm/dsync/dsync-mailbox.c --- dovecot-2.2.33.2/src/doveadm/dsync/dsync-mailbox.c 2017-06-23 13:18:28.000000000 +0200 +++ dovecot-2.2.34/src/doveadm/dsync/dsync-mailbox.c 2018-02-28 15:45:34.000000000 +0100 @@ -1,7 +1,9 @@ -/* Copyright (c) 2013-2017 Dovecot authors, see the included COPYING file */ +/* Copyright (c) 2013-2018 Dovecot authors, see the included COPYING file */ #include "lib.h" #include "istream.h" +#include "mail-storage-private.h" +#include "dsync-brain-private.h" #include "dsync-mailbox.h" void dsync_mailbox_attribute_dup(pool_t pool, @@ -20,3 +22,40 @@ dest_r->last_change = src->last_change; dest_r->modseq = src->modseq; } + +int dsync_mailbox_lock(struct dsync_brain *brain, struct mailbox *box, + struct file_lock **lock_r) +{ + const char *path, *error; + int ret; + + /* Make sure the mailbox is open - locking requires it */ + if (mailbox_open(box) < 0) { + i_error("Can't open mailbox %s: %s", mailbox_get_vname(box), + mailbox_get_last_internal_error(box, &brain->mail_error)); + return -1; + } + + ret = mailbox_get_path_to(box, MAILBOX_LIST_PATH_TYPE_INDEX, &path); + if (ret < 0) { + i_error("Can't get mailbox %s path: %s", mailbox_get_vname(box), + mailbox_get_last_internal_error(box, &brain->mail_error)); + return -1; + } + if (ret == 0) { + /* No index files - don't do any locking. In theory we still + could, but this lock is mainly meant to prevent replication + problems, and replication wouldn't work without indexes. */ + *lock_r = NULL; + return 0; + } + + if (mailbox_lock_file_create(box, DSYNC_MAILBOX_LOCK_FILENAME, + brain->mailbox_lock_timeout_secs, + lock_r, &error) <= 0) { + i_error("Failed to lock mailbox %s for dsyncing: %s", + box->vname, error); + return -1; + } + return 0; +}

2 2

auth_policy in a non-authenticating proxy chain
by Peter Mogensen 15 Sep '18

15 Sep '18

Hi, I was looking into the new Authentication Policy feature: https://wiki2.dovecot.org/Authentication/Policy I had kinda hoped that I would be able to enfore this in a proxy running in front of several backends. This proxy does not authenticate. It use "nopassword". But I realize that the "succes" reported in the final authpolicy req. (command=report) is not what is actaully happening on the IMAP protocol level, but rather the result of the passdb chain in the proxy. (I should probably have predicted this, it's kinda reasonable). However... since the proxy use "nopassword", ALL passdb lookups result in "success", so the proxy will never report an authentication failure to the authpolicy server. This, of course, forces me to do the authpolicy check on the backend with a shared state, but It would still have been nice to have the proxy being able to do the first "command=allow" req. and reject attemps already there even though the backend does "command=report". /Peter

3 4

Occasional crash in db-auth.c (Valgrind: Invalid read of size 4 et al.), Dovecot 2.2.27+
by Jonas Wielicki 14 Sep '18

14 Sep '18

Dear list, We are encountering troubles with dovecot using LDAP userdbs on Debian stretch (but if I’m reading valgrind correctly, we can reproduce this with vanilla dovecot master). Minimal reproducer below. While testing an upgrade to Debian stretch (dovecot-core=1:2.2.27-3+deb9u1), auth-worker has stopped working. We are using two LDAP user databases; one which is iterable, and one which is not (for reasons; I think this is not relevant; if it is, we’re happy to elaborate). The issue seems to be present in any LDAP userdb iteration handling, but it only seems to cause a crash in certain conditions which seem to be reproducibly caused by our setup for some reason. We’re seeing one of two errors. Variant A: Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: *** Error in `dovecot/auth': free(): corrupted unsorted chunks: 0x000056553f0fcfa0 *** Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: ======= Backtrace: ========= Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ libc.so.6(+0x70bcb)[0x7f78426adbcb] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ libc.so.6(+0x76f96)[0x7f78426b3f96] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ libc.so.6(+0x777de)[0x7f78426b47de] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /usr/lib/dovecot/modules/ auth/libauthdb_ldap.so(+0x5bde)[0x7f7842008bde] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /usr/lib/dovecot/ libdovecot.so.0(io_loop_call_io+0x52)[0x7f78430cfdd2] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /usr/lib/dovecot/ libdovecot.so.0(io_loop_handler_run_internal+0x109)[0x7f78430d1409] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /usr/lib/dovecot/ libdovecot.so.0(io_loop_handler_run+0x3c)[0x7f78430cfe6c] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /usr/lib/dovecot/ libdovecot.so.0(io_loop_run+0x38)[0x7f78430d0018] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /usr/lib/dovecot/ libdovecot.so.0(master_service_run+0x13)[0x7f7843057e93] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: dovecot/auth(main+0x398) [0x56553da45f98] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf1)[0x7f784265d2b1] Jan 27 13:40:05 up2 dovecot: auth-worker: Error: dovecot/auth(_start+0x2a) [0x56553da461aa] Variant B: Jan 27 13:06:56 up2 dovecot: auth-worker(27495): Panic: file db-ldap.c: line 840 (db_ldap_result_unref): assertion failed: (res->refcount > 0) Jan 27 13:06:56 up2 dovecot: auth-worker(27495): Error: Raw backtrace: /usr/ lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so.0(+0x95272) [0x7f027a4fc272] -> /usr/lib/dovecot/ libdovecot.so.0(+0x9536d) [0x7f027a4fc36d] -> /usr/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so. 0(i_fatal+0) [0x7f027a492951] -> /usr/lib/dovecot/modules/auth/ libauthdb_ldap.so(+0x3868) [0x7f0279447868] -> /usr/lib/dovecot/modules/auth/ libauthdb_ldap.so(+0x5d7c) [0x7f0279449d7c] -> /usr/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so. 0(io_loop_call_io+0x52) [0x7f027a510dd2] -> /usr/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so. 0(io_loop_handler_run_internal+0x109) [0x7f027a512409] -> /usr/lib/dovecot/ libdovecot.so.0(io_loop_handler_run+0x3c) [0x7f027a510e6c] -> /usr/lib/ dovecot/libdovecot.so.0(io_loop_run+0x38) [0x7f027a511018] -> /usr/lib/ dovecot/libdovecot.so.0(master_service_run+0x13) [0x7f027a498e93] -> dovecot/ auth(main+0x398) [0x55b981cd2f98] -> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so. 6(__libc_start_main+0xf1) [0x7f0279a9e2b1] -> dovecot/auth(_start+0x2a) [0x55b981cd31aa] When running auth-worker within valgrind, we get more information (valgrind extract from mail.log attached for two versions of dovecot). We have attached mail.log contents for the respective valgrind runs. This seems to affect at least 2.2.27 onwards. We can reproduce the crash with our production data 100% of the time. The valgrind error is present even with very minimal setups (see below). Unfortunately, I haven’t been able so far to create an LDAP database which produces the crash as reliable as our production database does (which we cannot share for obvious reasons). Minimal Reproducer of Valgrind error: - Install dovecot 2.2.27 from debian stretch, or compile from master. - Install valgrind - In conf.d/10-auth.conf, disable auth-system.conf.ext - In conf.d/10-auth.conf, enable auth-ldap.conf.ext - Set contents of dovecot-ldap.conf.ext to: hosts = localhost base = dc=nodomain - In conf.d/10-master.conf, in section "service auth-worker", set executable = /usr/bin/valgrind /usr/lib/dovecot/auth -w (path may differ on your system) - Install an LDAP server with a database for dc=nodomain; this is trivial to do with debian: Simply install slapd and systemctl start slapd. - Start dovecot - Run doveadm user '*' - You should find the error in the mail.log. I hope this is somehow useful to fix our crash issue. We’ll be happy to provide more information as needed. kind regards, Jonas

4 4

Status of SMTPUTF8?
by Noah Tilton 14 Sep '18

14 Sep '18

I was wondering whether there is a roadmap for adding SMTPUTF8 support to Dovecot? My delivery pattern is Postfix -> Dovecot LMTP and it is choking on utf8 messages. I might be able to volunteer some of my time as a developer. Another thread about this seemed to go unanswered: http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2016-September/105474.html http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/320091/configure-postfix-and-doveco… -Noah

4 3

Letsencrypt certificate for repo.dovecot.org expired May 14th..
by B. Reino 12 Sep '18

12 Sep '18

Dear all, Just in case you've missed it, the certificate for repo.dovecot.org just expired yesterday. This causes errors in e.g. apt-get update. Thanks in advance for fixing it, -- B. Reino

2 6

Re: dying on osx
by Mike Makuch 04 Sep '18

04 Sep '18

I found and tried this work around on the man page: https://www.unix.com/man-page/all/5/ngroups_max/ but I still get the same "Too many extra groups" error even when I start dovecot with the above program to limit the # of groups. I suspect that dovecot is adding a number of groups when it starts up. I've hacked a work around to get it working for me on my laptop: diff --git a/src/lib/restrict-access.c b/src/lib/restrict-access.c @@ -224,7 +224,12 @@ static void fix_groups_list(const struct restrict_access_settings *set, - if (setgroups(gid_count, gid_list) < 0) { + if (setgroups(gid_count > NGROUPS_MAX ? 16 : gid_count, gid_list) < 0) { if (errno == EINVAL) { i_fatal("setgroups(%s) failed: Too many extra groups", set->extra_groups == NULL ? "" : and this works. I'm not sure what the right solution is for a PR. Any suggestions? Thanks Mike On 8/10/18 11:04, Aki Tuomi wrote: > Is the user member of mail group? > > > > --- > Aki Tuomi > Dovecot oy > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Mike Makuch <1mikemakuch(a)gmail.com> > Date: 10/08/2018 19:02 (GMT+02:00) > To: Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi(a)dovecot.fi> > Cc: dovecot(a)dovecot.org > Subject: Re: dying on osx > > Maybe an old problem that has resurfaced??? > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8773 > > Mike > > > > On 8/10/18 10:54, Aki Tuomi wrote: >> I have to see if this is reproducible outside mac. >> >> >> >> --- >> Aki Tuomi >> Dovecot oy >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Mike Makuch <1mikemakuch(a)gmail.com> >> Date: 10/08/2018 18:46 (GMT+02:00) >> To: Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi(a)dovecot.fi> >> Subject: Re: dying on osx >> >> I did find that page and tried a few things there. My config has all of >> the settings there except 3: >> >> mail_access_groups = mail >> mbox_read_locks = fcntl >> mbox_write_locks = fcntl >> >> I add them to my config, restart and get the same abort >> >> 20180810-103849 imap(mkm)<79213><MkA5ihZzmdh/AAAB>: Fatal: >> setgroups(mail,505) failed: Too many extra groups >> >> I've tried numerous other settings as well. >> >> Thanks for any further advice >> >> Mike >> >> >> On 8/10/18 08:45, Aki Tuomi wrote: >> > Can you try this config and report back? >> > >> > >> https://superuser.com/questions/957272/dotlock-permissions-problems-with-do… >> > >> > Aki >> > >> >> On 10 August 2018 at 16:39 Mike Makuch <1mikemakuch(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> OSX 10.13.6 High Sierra, dovecot 2.3.2.1 >> >> >> >> dovecot starts up and runs but dies as soon as my mail client makes a >> >> request with log and config below. >> >> >> >> And advice appreciated. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 20180810-083730 auth: Debug: auth client connected (pid=77432) >> >> >> >> 20180810-083730 auth: Debug: client in: AUTH 1 PLAIN >> >> service=imap secured session=xo1p2BRzZNd/AAAB lip=127.0.0.1 >> >> rip=127.0.0.1 lport=143 rport=55140 >> >> 20180810-083730 auth: Debug: client passdb out: CONT 1 >> >> 20180810-083730 auth: Debug: client in: CONT 1 AG1rbQBta20xMjM= >> >> (previous base64 data may contain sensitive data) >> >> 20180810-083730 auth: Debug: static(mkm,127.0.0.1,<xo1p2BRzZNd/AAAB>): >> >> lookup >> >> 20180810-083730 auth: Debug: client passdb out: OK 1 user=mkm >> >> host=localhost nopasswd=y >> >> 20180810-083730 auth: Debug: master in: REQUEST 4201906177 77432 >> >> 1 b8126b4b71be2959fc7716888eccc566 session_pid=77433 >> >> request_auth_token >> >> 20180810-083730 auth-worker(77426): Debug: >> >> passwd(mkm,127.0.0.1,<xo1p2BRzZNd/AAAB>): lookup >> >> 20180810-083730 auth: Debug: master userdb out: USER 4201906177 >> >> mkm system_groups_user=mkm uid=503 gid=20 home=/Users/mkm >> >> auth_token=4d2bb44168df3d63e4e1bb352e59de632bc7da49 >> >> 20180810-083730 imap-login: Info: Login: user=<mkm>, method=PLAIN, >> >> rip=127.0.0.1, lip=127.0.0.1, mpid=77433, secured, >> >> session=<xo1p2BRzZNd/AAAB> >> >> 20180810-083730 imap(mkm)<77433><xo1p2BRzZNd/AAAB>: Fatal: >> >> setgroups(505) failed: Too many extra groups >> >> >> >> # doveconf -n >> >> # 2.3.2.1 (0719df592): /usr/local/etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf >> >> # OS: Darwin 17.7.0 x86_64 >> >> # Hostname: pine >> >> auth_debug = yes >> >> auth_debug_passwords = yes >> >> default_internal_user = _dovecot >> >> default_login_user = _dovenull >> >> disable_plaintext_auth = no >> >> listen = 127.0.0.1 >> >> log_path = /var/log/dovecot >> >> log_timestamp = "%Y%m%d-%H%M%S " >> >> mail_debug = yes >> >> mail_gid = staff >> >> mail_location = mbox:~/Mail:INBOX=/var/mail/%u >> >> mail_privileged_group = mail >> >> mail_uid = _dovecot >> >> passdb { >> >> args = password=*** host=localhost nopasswd=y >> >> driver = static >> >> } >> >> passdb { >> >> args = login >> >> driver = pam >> >> } >> >> protocols = imap >> >> service auth { >> >> user = root >> >> } >> >> service imap-login { >> >> inet_listener imap { >> >> address = * >> >> port = 143 >> >> } >> >> } >> >> ssl = no >> >> userdb { >> >> driver = passwd >> >> } >> >> >> >> >> >

2 1