+1, and while you SHOULD try to block before DATA when you can, to
reduce loads on servers, and not tie up the SMTP connections any longer
than you need, for rules bases on content, it is perfectly well to send
a 5XX after data, and while there may be still some 'broken' MTA's and
clients that
First thing first, this isn't necessary a Dovecot related thread and
using a challenge-response system like the one suggested by the
initiator ("click here if you're not yet another bloody SEO guru") is
plain wrong for several reasons, having said that:
On 12-06-2020 11:56, Andreas Born wrote:
Am 12.06.2020 um 04:43 schrieb Ralph Seichter:
* Andreas Born:
I meant the different stages when receiving mails over SMTP [...]
I am well aware of the technical details of SMTP. Your comment is
unclear to me because the OP did not make any limitations on when he
wants to counter spam, so why
Am 12.06.2020 um 04:43 schrieb Adi Pircalabu:
First thing first, this isn't necessary a Dovecot related thread and
yeah, and i'm sorry for that. Just thought to give some information on
an issue that actually turns out to be completely out-dated.
using a challenge-response system like the o
Am 12.06.2020 um 04:28 schrieb Joseph Tam:
On Fri, 12 Jun 2020, Andreas Born wrote:
Maybe, and I really hope so, this problem no longer exists. I will
immediately reconfigure my mail system, if rejecting mails after DATA
will be safe and reliable nowadays.
In particular, bots don't hang aro
* Andreas Born:
> I meant the different stages when receiving mails over SMTP [...]
I am well aware of the technical details of SMTP. Your comment is
unclear to me because the OP did not make any limitations on when he
wants to counter spam, so why would we artificially limit ourselves in
this di
On Fri, 12 Jun 2020, Andreas Born wrote:
Maybe, and I really hope so, this problem no longer exists. I will
immediately reconfigure my mail system, if rejecting mails after DATA will be
safe and reliable nowadays.
In particular, bots don't hang around for the DATA response.
Any MTA that igno
Am 12.06.2020 um 02:03 schrieb Ralph Seichter:
* Andreas Born:
There exists one problem: at this stage of mail reception you have no
body content nor header information on which a milter may perform
deeper analysis, only envelope data.
I am not sure what you mean by "this stage of mail recept
* Andreas Born:
> There exists one problem: at this stage of mail reception you have no
> body content nor header information on which a milter may perform
> deeper analysis, only envelope data.
I am not sure what you mean by "this stage of mail reception", or what
software you are using that may
Am 11.06.2020 um 19:15 schrieb Ralph Seichter:
Generating backscatter is definitely not a good move, and it is even
prone to punish yourself. Better to reject the offending message with
a 5xx status code and some explanatory text or the URL.
The various tests required to come to a decision about
On 2020-06-11 16:58, Richard Siddall wrote:
This seems similar to the long-dead Active Spam Killer
(https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Active_Spam_Killer) with updates for
GDPR.
http://www.paganini.net/ask/
dead projects
> Wrong mailing list. You need to ask on the list for the MTA you are
> using (Sendmail, Postfix, &c).
Yes will ask soon at sendmail.
> Actually, this sounds like a job for a custom milter, which would
look
> at the domain name of the sending system, and reject the mail with
your
>
On 11 Jun 2020, at 03:54, Marc Roos wrote:
> Yes tell that to the people that create rhel6, rhel7 and rhel8 and give
> lts support.
Please post only properly quoted messages and do not top post.
> SpamAssassin 3.3.1 is also not very smart in 2020
Also, do not run old versions of Spamassasin.
On 11 Jun 2020, at 04:05, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> I use greylisting with my postfix. On Debian and Devuan th package is
> called 'postgrey'.
As was recently discussed on the postfix list, this WILL result in lost mail,
and it WILL screw with "enter this validation code" emails sent to users who
* Marc Roos:
> 3. system recognizes as this email never been seen before
> 4. auto reply with something like (maybe with a wait time of x hours):
>Your message did not receive the final recipient. You are sending
>from a known spam provider
Generating backscatter is definitely not a good
* Hendrik Boom:
> I use greylisting with my postfix. On Debian and Devuan th package is
> called 'postgrey'.
Classical, time-based greylisting like Postgrey is problematic in this
age of 2FA and other email-based confirmation codes. Besides, Postfix
has its own, superior mechanism called "Postscr
Am 11.06.2020 um 16:58 schrieb Richard Siddall:
Marc Roos wrote:
I am sick of this gmail spam. Does anyone know a solution where I can do
something like this:
1. received email from adcpni...@gmail.com
2. system recognizes this email address has been 'whitelisted', continue
with 7.
3. system
Marc Roos wrote:
I am sick of this gmail spam. Does anyone know a solution where I can do
something like this:
1. received email from adcpni...@gmail.com
2. system recognizes this email address has been 'whitelisted', continue
with 7.
3. system recognizes as this email never been seen before
4
Wrong mailing list. You need to ask on the list for the MTA you are
using (Sendmail, Postfix, &c).
Actually, this sounds like a job for a custom milter, which would look
at the domain name of the sending system, and reject the mail with your
message. Dunno if there is one that works exactly
>> Yes tell that to the people that create rhel6, rhel7 and rhel8 and
give
>> lts support.
>
>as said that has nothing to do with your wrong training and RHEL has
>always the same problem: you can't package the latest and greatest
shit
>over 10 years because it requrires newer versions
Yes thanks, I know, however the criteria for putting emails into this
procedure is a different subject. Just wondered what people are doing.
-Original Message-
To: dovecot@dovecot.org
Subject: Re: handling spam from gmail.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:19:50AM +0200, Marc Roos wrote
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:19:50AM +0200, Marc Roos wrote:
>
>
> I am sick of this gmail spam. Does anyone know a solution where I can do
> something like this:
>
> 1. received email from adcpni...@gmail.com
> 2. system recognizes this email address has been 'whitelisted', continue
> with 7.
>
; dovecot; lists; users
Subject: Re: handling spam from gmail.
Am 11.06.20 um 11:04 schrieb Marc Roos:
> I have got lots of shit coming from *.google.com like these:
>
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00
because you are too dumb to train your bayes
give me one suc
Your logics sucks. There is a difference between how email works and how
spamassassin works. You are assuming that everyone in the world is using
spamassassin by including it in 'how email works'.
Maybe you like to post a link to your bayes files
Am 11.06.20 um 11:13 schrieb Marc Roos:
>
...@thelounge.net]
Sent: donderdag 11 juni 2020 10:25
To: Marc Roos; dovecot; users
Subject: Re: handling spam from gmail.
Am 11.06.20 um 10:19 schrieb Marc Roos:
> I am sick of this gmail spam. Does anyone know a solution where I can
> do something like this:
>
> 1. received email
25 matches
Mail list logo
