Re: Proprietary or non-standard SMTP AUTH mechanisms

[Hector Santos <hsantos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> Do they deviate from the SMTP AUTH framework in any way, other than 
> maybe the method name?

No deviation other than a private method name, proprietary, but 
standard implementation of SMTP AUTH. Just a private/unique method 
100% designed for proprietary client entry only.

> That's really what I'm after.  If you do your own thing with its own 
> name but still stick to the general base64 and "334" and such, then 
> it's still compliant as far as the context about which I'm asking.

I see your point.

We consider it a trade secret and part of our corporate and legal 
security policy not divulge details, but frankly nothing special other 
than leveraging a standard protocol method including the client/server 
base64 SASL challenge/response handshaking and the expected SMTP AUTH 
reply codes that by design offers the flexibility to offer new 
methods, including non-standard ones.

While off hand at the moment I can't recall any specific method by 
name, I would swear there are quite a few of others private methods by 
just seeing some obscure/unknown AUTH names exposed in logs.  But I 
don't known if they were ever proposed I-D or not.


--
Sincerely

Hector Santos
http://www.santronics.com
jabber: hector@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx