To me maddy would feel like sleeping on live electrical wires, only they are insulated by a thin layer of paper. Hope the isolation does not get scratched anywhere while you sleep. Even a non-dockerized, traditional setup like postfix+dovecot has better isolation.
Depending on how many targeted attacks you get in a day, you may pull apart the monlithic server and run inbound processing, filtering, IMAP access and outbound queueing as separate processes or even on separate systems.
(Probably i should put a better wording on https://foxcpp.dev/maddy/faq/)
That being said, my project greatly benefits from Go concurrency features and simple I/O primitives. Also there are libraries written by emersion for nearly everything.
> you may pull apart the monlithic server and run inbound processing, filtering, IMAP access and outbound queueing as separate processes or even on separate systems.
Can this be done without forking source code? E.g. just configuring two instances.
Thanks for the link to FAQ. Actually, simple, no bloat’ little dependency software definitely has some appeal.
This page shows how to configure maddy to only handle SMTP: https://foxcpp.dev/maddy/tutorials/smtp-only/ You can follow it but swap Dovecot for another maddy instance, configured as shown here: https://foxcpp.dev/maddy/tutorials/imap-only/
This works because maddy implements both client and server for Dovecot's SASL delegation protocol.
Alternatively you can configure pass_table to read from shared SQL database. Hm, maddy-tables(5) man page is not rendered on the website but you can look at sql_query module.
I think that is overkill for self hosting. Also as the author says below, Go is more memory safe than C/C++ in that there is no use after free and buffers are bounds checked.
A machine which has IMAP open tends to look like it has some good stuff.
I just forward incoming emails to an internal SMTP server which also serves as IMAP server, so MX records won't simply reveal your IMAP server as well.