Um, what if the most critical communication infrastructure in your
business is quietly running on like a bloated 30 year old house of cards.
Support for today's deep dive actually comes from safe server.
Yeah.
Which is super relevant to this.
Right.
Because when we talk about digital infrastructure, the default move is
usually to just, you know, hand the keys over to the massive proprietary behemoths.
Oh, definitely like Microsoft exchange or a Google workspace.
Exactly.
But what happens when you need absolute verifiable control over your data for a
lot of organizations, especially when you're dealing with legal regulatory or
strict compliance requirements, things like email retention policies, right.
Or audit trails or protecting highly sensitive financial records.
In those cases, data sovereignty is literally illegal mandate.
You have to know exactly where your data lives and who has access to it.
So safe server provides this really powerful open source alternative
to those proprietary giants.
They handle the hosting entirely on secure German servers to ensure
strict data protection, which is huge for compliance.
Yeah, exactly.
And they advise on the implementation and they can be commissioned for
consulting on robust open source solutions.
Like, well, the exact one we're exploring today.
You can find out more and take real control of your infrastructure
at www.safeserver.de.
It just fundamentally shifts the power dynamic.
You know, when you realize you don't have to permanently rent your core
communication tools from a mega corporation.
It really does.
There are these highly viable, incredibly secure alternatives out there,
completely free from vendor lock-in.
If you just understand how to look under the hood.
Well, welcome everyone today.
We're opening up a topic that usually makes even reasonably tech savvy
people run for the Hills.
Oh yeah, for sure.
We're talking about hosting your own email server.
Our sources today are the official GitHub repository and website excerpts
for a piece of software called Open SMT PD.
Yep.
And our mission here is really to demystify the server side SMTP protocol and
give you the beginner listening right now, a clear jargon free entry point into
understanding how this vital piece of the internet actually works.
Because email is arguably the absolute lifeblood of the modern internet.
I mean, it just is without a doubt yet the actual mechanics of how a message
gets from person A to person B, it remains entirely invisible to most of the
people who rely on it every single day.
Okay, let's unpack this.
Taking control of your email infrastructure is a complete game changer.
But before we talk about how to install this specific software, we need to
understand the fundamental problem it was trying to solve in the first place.
Right.
Like why build a completely new mail server from scratch?
Well, to understand the motivation, we kind of have to look at what Open SMTPD
actually does at its core.
It's a free implementation of the server side SMTP protocol.
SMTP meaning a simple mail transfer protocol.
Yeah, it's specifically defined by this technical standard known as RFC5321.
Okay.
Let me throw out an analogy to kind of ground this for you listening.
Think of the SMTP protocol as like the universal rule book for a digital post
office.
I like that.
Yeah.
It dictates how the letters are stamped, how the addresses are read by the machines
and you know, how the mail trucks from entirely different cities managed to
actually talk to each other.
Exactly.
And Open SMTPD then is the actual physical routing facility.
It's taking those letters from ordinary machines and ensuring they get to other
systems, speaking that universal SMTT language.
Right.
The protocol is just the abstract set of rules.
The implementation is the actual machinery doing the heavy lifting.
Open SMTPD was primarily developed by Jules Chahade and Eric Fureau working
alongside the OpenBSD project.
Okay.
And their driving force for creating this new machinery is honestly incredibly
relatable to anyone who works in tech.
It was born out of pure dissatisfaction with other implementations.
Okay.
But let me play devil's advocate for a second here.
With so many massive pre-packaged mail servers already out there that have
literally been running the internet for decades, why bother rewriting the post
office from scratch?
Aren't established protocols already sort of set in stone?
It just seems like reinventing the wheel when we already have heavyweights
in this space.
No, it's a completely fair question.
I mean, the protocol itself, the RFC 5-3-21 rule book we mentioned, is
incredibly standard.
It hasn't fundamentally changed its core mission in decades.
Right.
But the implementations of it over the years had become just these massive
tangled webs of code.
If you look at the historical context, older mail servers like SendMail, they
were written in the 1980s.
Oh, wow.
So long before the modern hostile internet existed.
Exactly.
Over the decades, developers just kept bolting on new features, patching
newly discovered vulnerabilities and, you know, adding workarounds for every
weird edge case imaginable.
So they just got bigger and bigger.
Yeah, they became monolithic, incredibly complex to configure and notoriously
difficult to secure.
So the dissatisfaction wasn't just about the software, like looking ugly on a
screen, it was about the fact that decades of bloated code create a massive surface
area for hackers to attack.
Precisely.
And if we connect this to the bigger picture, you have to look at the community
building Open SMTPD.
It's part of the OpenBSD project.
Right.
Which has a very specific reputation.
Yeah, in the software world, the OpenBSD community is famous for an almost
obsessive focus on proactive security and clean, auditable code.
They simply do not tolerate bloat.
I mean, that makes sense.
They wanted a fairly complete SMTP implementation, but one that was entirely
stripped down, streamlined and inherently secure by its very design.
And crucially, it operates under the permissive ISC license.
Meaning what?
Exactly.
It means the software is freely usable and reusable by everyone.
And they weren't just building a better post office for their own private use.
They were giving the blueprints away to the world.
Which is an incredible engine for innovation, right?
Yeah.
Dissatisfaction, driving a desire for something cleaner, safer and entirely open.
Absolutely.
But since OpenSMTP was born out of this desire for a better system from a
notoriously security obsessed community, how does that philosophy
actually manifest in the architecture?
Like how is it built under the hood?
Well, looking at the repository data, the code base is overwhelmingly written in C.
It makes up about 84.5% of the code and C is an incredibly fast language.
It gives the developer direct access to the hardware's memory, which makes
it highly performant for a network server handling thousands of messages.
Wait, hold on.
Giving a developer direct access to memory is exactly what usually causes
the security nightmares we were just talking about, isn't it?
Yes, yes it is.
Isn't C notorious for memory leaks and buffer overflows?
If you give a developer that much raw power, you give them the power to
accidentally leave a back door wide open.
You're spot on.
That is the eternal double-edged sword of writing software in C.
For you listening who might not be familiar with the buffer overflow,
imagine you have a digital box designed to hold exactly 10 characters of text.
Okay.
And a language like C, if you aren't perfectly careful with your code, a
malicious hacker can send a hundred characters to that box.
The extra 90 characters spill over the edges of the box and overwrite the
adjacent memory of the server.
Yeah.
And if the hacker crafts those extra characters to be executable code, the
server might just blindly execute it, giving the attacker total control of the
machine.
So how does a team obsessed with security build a network-facing mail
server in a language prone to those exact kinds of catastrophic spills?
They mitigate the risk by relying heavily on a structural concept called
privileged separation.
Privileged separation.
Yeah.
Instead of running the entire mail server as one giant, powerful program, they
break it apart.
When you set this up, the system requires a specific user structure at the
operating
system level to run securely.
What does that look like?
It requires at least one user, which defaults to a name called MTPD, but the
documentation strongly, strongly prefers that you use two completely separate
users, SMTPD and SMTPQ.
Okay, let's visualize this because the mechanics of privilege separation are
actually brilliant.
Let's compare this to user system to a bank.
Okay.
The first user, SMTPD, is the friendly teller at the front desk.
That teller is the only one interacting with the outside public.
They accept incoming mail.
They chat with the servers across the internet.
But the second user, SMTPQ, is the manager locked securely inside the thick
steel vault, handling the actual sensitive queue of emails and the core files.
What's fascinating here is how the operating system enforces the separation.
Because the teller and the vault manager are completely different user accounts,
the underlying operating system kernel builds a hard wall between them.
Ah, I see.
If a malicious hacker sends a highly sophisticated buffer overflow attack and
successfully compromises the teller at the front desk, the damage stops there.
Because the teller literally does not have the operating system
privileges to open the vault.
Exactly.
Even if the hacker completely takes over this MTPD process, they can't access the
core data, they can't read the sensitive email queues, and they can't take over
the entire server.
That's incredibly smart.
The developers are incredibly explicit about this design choice too.
The documentation specifically notes that using two users instead of one will
increase security by a large factor.
I mean, I'd hope so.
But they go a step further.
They actually state that if you voluntarily choose to use only one user,
you either want to actively reduce your security or, and this is a direct quote
from the creators, you have absolute more faith in our code than we do.
Wait, really?
You have more faith in our code than we do.
That is a wild thing for a software developer to put in their
official documentation.
Right.
But it is the ultimate hallmark of great security engineering.
Hubris is the enemy of security.
By baking privilege separation into the very fabric of the software and by
openly acknowledging that no human written code is ever completely perfect.
They protect the user from unforeseen zero day vulnerabilities.
It's a philosophy of assuming breach.
They assume the front desk teller might eventually be compromised by a clever
enough attack and they design the architecture so the vault remains
impenetrable anyway.
But building a mathematically secure digital vault is one thing.
Getting people to actually use it is another.
Usually this level of obsessive security means the software is a total nightmare
to install and configure.
Oh, totally.
Is that the trade off we're looking at here?
If a beginner sitting at home wants to take control of their email routing, how
do they actually get this running without needing an advanced degree in computer
science?
This is where OpenSMTKD really shines as an entry point into self-hosting.
Historically, setting up a secure mail server meant downloading raw source code,
resolving dozens of obscure software dependencies manually, and compiling
everything from scratch.
It was a chaotic process that would easily frustrate a beginner.
But OpenSMTKD has incredibly broad operating system support natively.
It runs on Linux, Mac OS, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and DragonflyBSD.
So basically, almost any Unix-like environment you might be running on a
server or a home lab.
Exactly.
And more importantly, you don't have to compile it from source, though the
documentation provides the exact instructions if you really want to.
The source docs do list dependencies you need for compiling, like LiveVent and
OpenSSL.
Just to briefly clarify for you listening, a mail server needs a library
like LiveVent, because if 5,000 spam bots try to connect to your server at
the exact same millisecond...
Which happens?
Right.
You don't want the server trying to open 5,000 separate processes and just
crashing your machine's memory entirely.
LiveVent handles all those massive simultaneous network connections
efficiently in the background.
Precisely.
But for the beginner who just wants to get the software onto their machine to
start learning, they don't need to worry about manually installing
those underlying libraries.
Really?
Not at all.
You just use your system's native package manager.
You're on a standard Debian or Ubuntu server.
You just type sudo apt install opens mppd and the package manager
handles all the dependencies for you.
Oh, that's incredibly easy.
Yeah.
If you're on Alpine Linux, it's app install.
On Fedora, it's yum.
On OpenCSC, it's zipper.
You can even use McPorts on macOS.
It's also fully available via container images.
If you prefer deploying with Docker, the barrier to entry for simply
getting the software onto your machine is incredibly low.
But here's where it gets really interesting though.
Installation is usually the easy part.
The moment you actually have to configure a mail server is usually
when it turns into a nightmare spaghetti code and like 50 different
text files scattered across your hard drive.
Yeah.
The configuration to appreciate how open SMTPD solves this.
You really have to look at what came before it.
The configuration file for legacy servers like send mail, a file
called sendmail.cf- was infamous in the IT world.
I've heard horror stories.
It literally looked like random line noise.
It was so complex that administrators had to use an entirely separate macro
language just to write the configuration file that would then run the mail server.
That's absurd.
Open SMTPD abandons all of that legacy complexity.
The core configuration lives in one single file, just one.
It's located at excesa SMTPD.com.
Wow.
So you aren't chasing down hidden variables across a dozen nested directories.
Nope.
You define your rules, your domains and your routing right there in plain text.
And to control the software itself, Open SMTPD gives you a single unified
utility called SMTPTL.
Okay.
STPTTL.
Right.
In Unix terms, the mail server runs as a daemon, which is simply a background
process that quietly sits there listening for incoming network connections without
needing you to interact with it constantly.
Makes sense.
When you do need to interact with that daemon to start it, stop it, or peek
inside the queue of pending emails, you just use that one SMTPTL tool.
One plain text config file, one control tool, that is a massive architectural
shift from the legacy systems.
But that actually raises a really important question about the
reality of modernizing infrastructure.
What's that?
Let's say I'm an IT administrator managing an older server environment.
I have a lot of legacy applications running maybe some 15 year old billing
scripts or system notification tools.
Those old scripts are hard coded to look for a legacy program, specifically
send mail to push an invoice or an alert out to the internet.
Right.
Very common scenario.
If I install OpenSMTPTL and everything is now managed by this entirely
new SMTPTL tool, doesn't installing this software immediately break every
single legacy script that's blindly shouting for send mail.
It's a massive roadblock for modernizing infrastructure.
Yeah, the fear of breaking a 15 year old billing script is exactly why so many
companies leave bloated, vulnerable legacy software running on their servers.
He just, nobody wants to touch it.
Exactly.
You do not want to rewrite decades of legacy scripts just to upgrade your mail
router, but the developers behind OpenSMTPTL anticipated this exact friction point.
They built a historical interface compatibility mode directly into the software.
Oh, how does that actually work mechanically?
Does OpenSMTPTL have to run like a secondary fate legacy server in the
background just to catch those requests?
The mechanism is much more elegant than that.
It happens at the operating system level.
OpenSMTPTL simply impersonates those legacy tools.
Impersonates them?
Yeah.
That single control utility we just talked about, NGPFYTL, is programmed to
operate in compatibility mode if it detects that it's being called by a
historical name, like send mail, Nualises, mail, or make map.
So the new tool just puts on a disguise and pretends to be the old tool.
But how does the operating system know to route the request to the
new tool in the first place?
Through simple mapping.
On systems equipped with a mail wrapper, you just edit a single text file called
at sexymailer.conf and map the old legacy names to the new path.
Choose MTKPAL.
On other systems, you rely on symbolic links.
A symbolic link is basically a forwarding address at the post office.
You tell the operating system, hey, if a script comes looking for the file named
sendmail, just silently route that request directly to SMTPAPAL instead.
That is incredibly clever.
From the perspective of your 15 year old billing script, absolutely nothing has
changed. Nothing at all.
The script generates the invoice.
It shouts out for sendmail, just like it has for a decade.
But the operating system intercepts that call, forwards it to 7TPPATL, which
catches the request, processes it through Open SMTPD's highly secure
privileged separated vault and sends the email out to the Internet.
The old script is none the wiser.
It allows a beginner or a seasoned systems administrator to modernize a
server's infrastructure instantly without having to touch a single line of legacy
code in their applications.
That's huge.
The Open SMTPD project leaves it up to individual package maintainers to set
these symbolic links up natively during installation.
But the documentation provides the exact command line instructions to do it
yourself if needed.
It elegantly bridges the gap between the chaotic bloated past of email servers
and a clean minimalist future.
So what does this all mean for you listening right now?
It means that Open SMTPD takes what has historically been one of the most
intimidating complex tasks in IT, setting up a secure mail server and turns into
a highly transparent, manageable process.
Yeah, it really does.
It gives you a clean entry point into the world of internet routing, born
entirely out of a community's refusal to accept bloated software as a status
quo. It proves that with the right architectural design, like operating
system level privilege separation and a single plain text configuration file,
extreme complexity does not have to be the default state of the internet.
It strips away the intimidation factor entirely.
It allows you to peer behind the curtain of how these massive global systems
actually communicate and gives you the tools to participate in that network on
your own terms without sacrificing security.
And as we talk about participating in that network securely, we really need to
circle back to our sponsor, Safe Server.
While OpenSMTPD is incredibly accessible for learning the ropes and, you know,
setting up your own systems, let's look at the practical reality for organizations.
Right. When the stakes are higher.
Exactly. If you are a business, an association, or any group dealing with actual
client data, the stakes are exponentially higher.
You stand to gain massive tangible benefits from switching to an open source
solution like this. You eliminate vendor lock-in, you gain complete transparency
over your routing, and you achieve true data sovereignty.
Which is so critical.
But actually managing that infrastructure day to day, ensuring 247 uptime,
aggressively applying security patches, and maintaining strict regulatory
compliance that can quickly drain your internal IT resources dry.
Oh, completely. It's a full-time job.
Which is exactly why professionally managed hosting often makes far more sense
than self-operation for organizations.
Safe Server gives you the best of both worlds.
The uncompromised freedom and security of open source software,
backed by professional, managed hosting on secure German servers.
Yeah.
They're available for consulting on OpenSMTPD and similar robust alternatives,
tailoring the implementation to your exact organizational needs.
You can explore how they can help secure your communications infrastructure
at www.safeserver.de.
Because, honestly, choosing the right software is only half the battle.
Choosing the right environment to run it in is what dictates your long-term success.
Whether you're a learner experimenting in a home lab on a weekend,
or an enterprise securing a decade of legal audit trails.
We've covered a massive amount of ground today.
From the basic mechanics of how RFC FF321 actually moves a message across the globe,
to the brilliant humility of assuming your own code might fail
and building a vault to contain the blast.
But before we wrap up this deep dive, we'd like to leave you with something to chew
on.
Yeah.
If we look at the core lesson of what OpenSMTPD accomplished.
If email routing, which is arguably one of the oldest, most vital,
and historically complex arteries of the entire internet,
can be simplified this elegantly by a few developers
who are just completely dissatisfied with the status quo.
Right.
What other bloated legacy systems in our daily tech stack are we just blindly
accepting?
What other monolithic, insecure pieces of software are sitting on your server or
your desktop right now,
completely ripe for a minimalist open source revolution?
A great question to end on.
Thanks for taking this deep dive with us.
We'll catch you on the next one.