This discussion has been locked.

You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

POP3SSL with UTM 9.106-17

Hello togehter,

has anyone successfully running the POP3 proxy using SSL under UTM 9.106-17?

The best thread in this forum was for me https://community.sophos.com/products/unified-threat-management/astaroorg/f/56/t/49433.

There was an issue with using SSL for POP3 which should be fixed in 9.102 or 9.109. Now, I have release 9.106-17 and it doesn't seem to work. I got errors from the log like "Failed to shutdown SSL connection" and "SSL read failure".

I tried the self-signed certificates of the UTM "WebAdmin" and "Local X.509".

Thank you

TheExpert

This thread was automatically locked due to age.

0 TheExpert over 11 years ago

Hello together,

isn't there anyone in this forum who uses the POP3 proxy with SSL interception?

Thank you

TheExpert

Kind Regards

TheExpert
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel
0 solae over 11 years ago in reply to TheExpert

I've runned a POP3 Proxy (with P2S on a Server). The Connection were all SSL. I had no problem with 9.106-16.
But as you can see in my other thread, my POP3 Proxy completely failed after updateing to 9.106-17. I remember that there where some errors about "can't shutdown socket" or something like this before everything started to Fail about 1-2 hours after the Update, so i think that in 9.106-17 the POP3 Proxy realy has a bug.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel
0 alt0422 over 10 years ago

I'm on 9.106.-17 and I having issues with POP3 proxy, Theres is any way to go back to the 9.106-16?
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel
0 BAlfson over 10 years ago

Hi, alt, and welcome to the User BB!

I think that 9.106-16 was a soft-release of 9.106, and that the only 9.106 version released is -17.

Cheers - Bob

Sophos UTM Community Moderator
Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
Gold Solution Partner since 2005

MediaSoft, Inc. USA
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel
0 wk_03 over 10 years ago in reply to BAlfson

Is this bug fixed in 9.107-33 ?
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel
0 ChristianKüppers over 10 years ago

Hi
Unfortunately not. I run 9.107.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel