Steps to reproduce the issue:

- in one shell run: "python -m smtpd -n"
- in another one run: "for i in {1..1000};do nmap -sT -p 8025 localhost;done"

The server will print out the following output and just quit (DoS):

giampaolo@ubuntu:~/svn/python-2.7$ ./python -m smtpd -n 
error: uncaptured python exception, closing channel <__main__.PureProxy listening localhost:8025 at 0xb74b0f4c> (<class 'socket.error'>:[Errno 107] Transport endpoint is not connected [/home/giampaolo/svn/python-2.7/Lib/asyncore.py|read|79] [/home/giampaolo/svn/python-2.7/Lib/asyncore.py|handle_read_event|430] [/home/giampaolo/svn/python-2.7/Lib/smtpd.py|handle_accept|296] [/home/giampaolo/svn/python-2.7/Lib/smtpd.py|__init__|124] [/home/giampaolo/svn/python-2.7/Lib/socket.py|meth|222])
giampaolo@ubuntu:~/svn/python-2.7$ 

This is due to issue 6706.

It would be ideal to solve this issue in asyncore.py by fixing dispatcher.accept() once and for all, but I'm not sure whether this can be done in a fully retro-compatible way in terms of asyncore API.

Alternatively SMTPServer.handle_accept() can be fixed in the same way as pyftpdlib did:
http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib/source/browse/tags/release-0.5.2/pyftpdlib/ftpserver.py#622

   def handle_accept(self)
       try:
            sock, addr = self.accept()
        except TypeError:
            # sometimes accept() might return None
            return
        except socket.error, err:
            # ECONNABORTED might be thrown
            if err[0] != errno.ECONNABORTED:
                raise
            return
        else:
            # sometimes addr == None instead of (ip, port)
            if addr == None:
                return

Being not easy to patch asyncore in a retro-compatible way here's a patch for smtpd instead which can be applied to python 2.7, 3.1 and 3.2.
Tested with nmap as shown in my first message on both Linux and FreeBSD and not exceptions are raised.

Fixed in r84289.

Security fixes are allowed in 2.6 branch, so could you backport the fix also to 2.6 branch?

This is already in 2.6 branch.

No, it isn't in 2.6 branch.

You're right, I'm sorry. I looked at "Versions" field which has 2.6 set but it's not correct.

Reopening. I'll backport this at some point during this week, I hope.

I'm okay classifying this as a security bug that should be fixed in the 2.6 tree.

Fixed for Python 2.6 in r87123.
Closing out as fixed.