On 6/9/2014 7:12 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> I really should have figured this out ages ago, but...
> 
> Quite simply, there exits a small number of organizations that
> run afoul of my various smtpd_recipient_restrictions and/or my
> smtpd_helo_restrictions, but from which I need to be able to
> receive mail anyway.  (A small number of companies get snagged
> on reject_unknown_helo_hostname due to having botched the HELO
> strings on their outbound mail servers, and also, in the case of
> Microsoft, they seem to have managed to get numerous of their
> IPs listed on Spamcop.)
> 
> So anyway, I just now added the following to my pre-existing
> list of smtpd_recipient_restrictions:
> 
>     check_client_access cidr:/usr/local/etc/postfix/blacklists/cidr-whitelist
> 
> where my cidr-whitelist file currently contains just:
> 
>     # Microsoft
>     65.52.0.0/14 OK
> 
> Of course, I placed this new check_client_access clause above all of
> the other/pre-existing clauses in my smtpd_recipient_restrictions.
> 
> I just want to ask if I have done the proper thing here, because I've
> never done this before.
> 
> My hope is that I haven't inadvertantly opened up a relaying hole or
> anything awful like that.
> 
> One other question...
> 
> Currently, I have the following:
> 
> smtpd_helo_restrictions =
>         permit_mynetworks
>         reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname
>         reject_invalid_helo_hostname
>         reject_unknown_helo_hostname
> 
> In order to make sure that my new CIDR whitelist will allow in even
> mail from goofed-up sites that have botched their HELO strings, should
> I be moving the three reject_*helo_hostname clauses shown above down
> into my smtpd_recipient_restrictions... you know... to a position
> that comes *after* my new check_client_access clause?


Yes.  And if you have other separate smtpd_foo_restrictions sections you
should move those restriction parameters under
smtpd_recipient_restrictions as well.  This will give you precise
control over whitelisting and blacklisting order.

Cheers,

Stan

Reply via email to