Peter-
> My solution was this: Set up and OpenBSD box doing spamd plus any content
> filtering
> during receipt to a world-facing SMTP server on the same box. Make that box
> the
> publicly visible MX for the relevant domains, but set up the smtpd, postfix
> or exim
> (whatever you fancy) confi
Thank you for your insight. I believe you are exactly correct. I have
previously run OpenBSD as my router and spamd in the classic setup, so
that is my past experience base. I was hoping to use it in this situation
as just a proxy in front of the mail server, but that seems to be getting
outside o
On Thu, 26 May 2022, Arete wrote:
My setup: Re-purposed Mac Mini running MacOS 12.4 Monterey, Postfix &
Dovecot, smtp port-forwarded to this box from my firewall. OpenBSD 7.1
running in a VirtualBox machine on the same Mac Mini, with bridged
networking enabled.
insert obvious comment about Open
On 2022-05-27, Arete wrote:
> I’m setting up spamd in front of a Postfix mail server, and am having
> an issue with rdr-to rules not working the way I expect.
>
> My setup: Re-purposed Mac Mini running MacOS 12.4 Monterey, Postfix &
> Dovecot, smtp port-forwarded to this box from my firewall. Open
On 2022-04-15, alejan...@rogue-research.com
wrote:
> Hi Mr Hansteen,
>
> Thanks for the reply, I started my journey with OpenBSD this week and I
> decided to buy your book to help me understand its PF system, it's been
> very helpful. I've been reading man pages from pf,spamd,opensmtpd and
> s
Hi Mr Hansteen,
Thanks for the reply, I started my journey with OpenBSD this week and I
decided to buy your book to help me understand its PF system, it's been
very helpful. I've been reading man pages from pf,spamd,opensmtpd and
sysctl, perhaps I just need more reading and time to fully under
Hi Martin,
On Wed, 12 May 2021 13:24:29 + Martin wrote:
> I can't find in spamd(8) how to enable IPv6 listener ...
I thought there was an unofficial patch put up somewhere several years
ago, but I can't find it now. This is the nearest my searching got:
https://undeadly.org/cgi?action=articl
Hi Peter,
Great book of PF. I've read it early in 2015, very useful.
Since last updates all the incoming connections to my mail servers are IPv6,
unfortunately. Just before the updates it was IPv4, so spamd has been used for
all the incoming connections outside whitelists of known peers. Works
> 12. mai 2021 kl. 15:24 skrev Martin :
>
> Hi list,
>
> I can't find in spamd(8) how to enable IPv6 listener in addition to IPv4 one.
>
> Is it possible to set spamd(8) to listen on both IPv4 and IPv6?
Unfortunately spamd is IPv4 only.
Back in the day (2014ish?, about the time I was finishi
afaik spamd(8) does not support ipv6 (yet).
I also do not know if there is any ongoing effort for ipv6 to be added.
On 5/12/21 9:24 AM, Martin wrote:
Hi list,
I can't find in spamd(8) how to enable IPv6 listener in addition to IPv4 one.
Is it possible to set spamd(8) to listen on both IPv4 and
Am Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:46:28AM -0400 schrieb Aisha Tammy:
> afaik spamd(8) does not support ipv6 (yet).
> I also do not know if there is any ongoing effort for ipv6 to be added.
>
> On 5/12/21 9:24 AM, Martin wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I can't find in spamd(8) how to enable IPv6 listener in
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:28:29PM +, Nick Guenther wrote:
> February 22, 2021 1:22 PM, "Edgar Pettijohn" wrote:
>
> > Have you tried starting spamd with '-l ::1' to alter its address to bind
> > to?
>
> I hadn't! But it's no help:
>
> comms# /usr/libexec/spamd -l ::1 -d -v -G 15:4:864 -C
February 22, 2021 1:22 PM, "Edgar Pettijohn" wrote:
> Have you tried starting spamd with '-l ::1' to alter its address to bind
> to?
I hadn't! But it's no help:
comms# /usr/libexec/spamd -l ::1 -d -v -G 15:4:864 -C
/etc/letsencrypt/live/comms.kousu.ca/fullchain.pem -K
/etc/letsencrypt/live/co
Have you tried starting spamd with '-l ::1' to alter its address to bind
to?
Edgar
On Feb 22, 2021 10:11 AM, Nick Guenther wrote:
July 1, 2020 7:34 AM, "Harald Dunkel"
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> spamd(8) still mentions 127.0.0.1, but no indication of IPv6
support.
> Looking on Goog
July 1, 2020 7:34 AM, "Harald Dunkel" wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> spamd(8) still mentions 127.0.0.1, but no indication of IPv6 support.
> Looking on Google for "openbsd spamd ipv6" gives me some entries of
> 2015 and 2016, but no up-to-date information. Please excuse if I am
> too blind to see.
>
>
Hi Thuban,
On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 09:20:42 +0100 Thuban wrote:
> On the server with the highest priority (lower MX), I must set "-M
> nn.nn.nn.nn" where nn.nn.nn.nn is the IP of a lower priority MX?
Where nn.nn.nn.nn is the public IP of a fake backup MX server,
which *DOES* have an SMTP daemon runnin
Ok. Thanks a lot, will try that
On 2019-02-23 00:50, Admin Thorshammare wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> When running spamd in blcklist-mode, does it log it's actions anywhere?
> can't find any info on it, and I'm not even sure it's working.
>
> /Hasse
>
On Feb 22, 2019 5:51 PM, Geir Svalland wrote:
>
> Hello all.
>
> When running spamd in blcklist-mode, does it log it's actions anywhere?
> can't find any info on it, and I'm not even sure it's working.
>
> /Hasse
>
Pretty sure it logs to /var/log/daemon
Maybe start it with the -d flag to see i
On 11/4/2018 3:06 PM, Mik J wrote:
Thank you Peter for this opinion.
Misc User, these gmail, live, yahoo spams you're talking about are really
comming from IP addresses that belong to them ? Because on my side it seems
it's not the case.
In my greylist right now I have rosaronald70s...@gmai
On Sun, Nov 04, 2018 at 02:49:44PM -0800, Misc User wrote:
> On 11/4/2018 2:25 PM, Mik J wrote:
> > Hello Peter,
> >
> > Thank you for this article.
> > Do you know why, and particularly Microsoft, use very random IPs to send
> > mails.
> > In that way, they make greylisting not as reliable as
Thank you Peter for this opinion.
Misc User, these gmail, live, yahoo spams you're talking about are really
comming from IP addresses that belong to them ? Because on my side it seems
it's not the case.
In my greylist right now I have rosaronald70s...@gmail.com but if I check the
IP that orig
On 11/4/2018 2:25 PM, Mik J wrote:
Hello Peter,
Thank you for this article.
Do you know why, and particularly Microsoft, use very random IPs to send mails.
In that way, they make greylisting not as reliable as it should be. We could
all use greylisting if google or microsoft would use the sam
On 11/4/18 11:25 PM, Mik J wrote:
> Do you know why, and particularly Microsoft, use very random IPs to send
> mails.
> In that way, they make greylisting not as reliable as it should be. We could
> all use greylisting if google or microsoft would use the same 4 or 5 IPs to
> retry sending the
Hello Peter,
Thank you for this article.
Do you know why, and particularly Microsoft, use very random IPs to send mails.
In that way, they make greylisting not as reliable as it should be. We could
all use greylisting if google or microsoft would use the same 4 or 5 IPs to
retry sending the mai
A final followup on this issue - I wrote a (relatively) short piece on
greylisting vs domains with multiple outbound SMTP servers, which
includes the little script I use to create a nospamd from a list of
domains, of course by feeding to 'smtpctl spf walk'.
You can find the article at
https://bsdl
On 10/30/18 8:46 PM, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 30/10/2018 o 19:31, Peter N. M. Hansteen pisze:
>> yes, a well-known problem, and it's what nospamd (hinted at in the spamd
>> man pages) is for.
>>
>> To some extent it helps to whitelist IP addresses and networks that
>> domains list in their
W dniu 30/10/2018 o 23:39, Stuart Henderson pisze:
I haven't run spamd myself for years, I got fed up with delayed and
lost mails.
Thanks. That was probably the tipping comment for me - I decided to search
for alternative spam protection.
It's the lost e-mails bing the the thing I cannot affo
On 31.10.2018 17:09, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
On 10/30/18 8:05 PM, Mario Theodoridis wrote:
I ran into this problem as well.
I ended up writing a script that parses the SPF entries out of the greylist and
if reasonable, whitelists those ranges and removes the grey
list entries. It runs every 15 m
On 10/30/18 8:05 PM, Mario Theodoridis wrote:
> I ran into this problem as well.
> I ended up writing a script that parses the SPF entries out of the greylist
> and
> if reasonable, whitelists those ranges and removes the grey
> list entries. It runs every 15 minutes.
smtpctl now has an spf walk
On 30.10.2018 20:46, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
W dniu 30/10/2018 o 19:31, Peter N. M. Hansteen pisze:
yes, a well-known problem, and it's what nospamd (hinted at in the spamd
man pages) is for.
To some extent it helps to whitelist IP addresses and networks that
domains list in their SPF info.
* Stuart Henderson le [30-10-2018 23:39:23 +]:
> On 2018-10-30, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm configuring spamd and I noticed that when I send an e-mail from
> > GMail, each time the e-mail is submitted by a different IP address.
> >
> > Here is spamdb output after sending a te
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 18:54:43 + Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> Are there any solutions get around this problem? Ideally I'd like
> to just whitelist reputable mail providers ...
Yes Chris, see: http://web.Britvault.Co.UK/products/ungrey-robins/
Cheers,
--
Craig Skinner | http://linkd.in/yGqkv7
On 2018-10-30, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm configuring spamd and I noticed that when I send an e-mail from
> GMail, each time the e-mail is submitted by a different IP address.
>
> Here is spamdb output after sending a test email to myself:
>
> GREY|209.85.219.182|mail-yb1-f182.google.c
On 30.10.2018 13:59, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote:
> On 10/30/18 8:46 PM, Chris Narkiewicz wrote: W dniu 30/10/2018 o 19:31, Peter
> N. M. Hansteen pisze: yes, a well-known problem, and it's what nospamd
> (hinted at in the spamd
> man pages) is for.
>
> To some extent it helps to whitelist IP ad
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 08:59:07PM +0100, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote:
> On 10/30/18 8:46 PM, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> > W dniu 30/10/2018 o??19:31, Peter N. M. Hansteen pisze:
> >> yes, a well-known problem, and it's what nospamd (hinted at in the spamd
> >> man pages) is for.
> >>
> >> To some ex
On 10/30/18 8:46 PM, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 30/10/2018 o 19:31, Peter N. M. Hansteen pisze:
>> yes, a well-known problem, and it's what nospamd (hinted at in the spamd
>> man pages) is for.
>>
>> To some extent it helps to whitelist IP addresses and networks that
>> domains list in their
W dniu 30/10/2018 o 19:31, Peter N. M. Hansteen pisze:
yes, a well-known problem, and it's what nospamd (hinted at in the spamd
man pages) is for.
To some extent it helps to whitelist IP addresses and networks that
domains list in their SPF info.
Yeah, I hoped there are some reputable sources
On 10/30/18 7:54 PM, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm configuring spamd and I noticed that when I send an e-mail from
> GMail, each time the e-mail is submitted by a different IP address.
yes, a well-known problem, and it's what nospamd (hinted at in the spamd
man pages) is for.
To some ext
W dniu 30/10/2018 o 16:58, Chris Narkiewicz pisze:
W dniu 30/10/2018 o 15:56, Ricardo Mestre pisze:
Hi Chris,
You are running spamdb /var/db/spamdb, that's not the way to use it.
I'm sorry, you were right. I misread both your e-mail and man page.
Thank you all for help.
Best regards,
Chris
W dniu 30/10/2018 o 15:53, Solene Rapenne pisze:> do you run spamd-setup(8)?
Yes, I see that it downloads nixspam and loads 20k IPs into spamd.
Best regards,
Chris
W dniu 30/10/2018 o 15:56, Ricardo Mestre pisze:
Hi Chris,
You are running spamdb /var/db/spamdb, that's not the way to use it.
According to man spamdb(8) this is how to list all entries, which I
wanted to do.
I see no entries, so I assume the database is empty.
Best regards,
Chris
On 10/30/18 4:44 PM, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> Database file has correct perms:
>
> # ls- l /var/db/spamd
> -rw-r--r-- 1 _spamd _spamd 65536 Oct 30 05:30 /var/db/spamd
>
> # spamdb /var/db/spamd
>
I think what you are seeing is that spamdb doesn't expect the database
filename as a command li
Hi Chris,
You are running spamdb /var/db/spamdb, that's not the way to use it. The
proper way is to use spamdb key, where key is one of the IP entries you are
getting through spamd. Running just spamdb will show you all entries.
/mestre
On 15:44 Tue 30 Oct , Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to use spamd to block spam using graylisting, but the spamd
> database is not updated.
>
> I run /usr/libexec/spamd -v -d to see what's happening and I definitely
> see hosts connecting to it:
>
> (GREY) 209.85.219.176: mytestem...@gmail.com> ->
>
On 10/01/18 23:36, Antonino Sidoti wrote:
> I notice that Spamd when seeing a first time sender is not being labelled
> with “GREY” even though the log says it is.
>
> /var/log/maillog shows a sender being flagged as ‘GREY’;
>
> Oct 1 17:43:24 obsd-svr3 spamd[84545]: (GREY) 67.219.xxx.250:
>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 11:30 AM
> From: "Denis Fondras"
> To: misc@openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: spamd and IPv6
>
> > does anyone can tell me what the state of spamd and IPv6 is? I would
> > have expected it to work but I can't set for exam
On 18/02/14 11:30, Denis Fondras wrote:
does anyone can tell me what the state of spamd and IPv6 is? I would
have expected it to work but I can't set for exampe ::1 or [::1] as a
listening address (neither alone or together with 127.0.0.1).
Unsupported yet. phessler@ has a diff for it.
Thank
> does anyone can tell me what the state of spamd and IPv6 is? I would
> have expected it to work but I can't set for exampe ::1 or [::1] as a
> listening address (neither alone or together with 127.0.0.1).
>
Unsupported yet. phessler@ has a diff for it.
Hi again,
I looked further and notice not the syslogd was the cause but somehow
spamd died while talking to a server. Could something in the body screw
up spamd?
here are my logs on that:
- the spamd log file part
Oct 21 20:24:54 heimdal spamd[46664]: 60.167.119.193: disconnected after
42
Hi there,
spamd just died silently again tonight. whats the best way to approach
the debugging of this kind of behaviour. As I looked at my logs it seems
that Syslogd causes this because so here is my syslog.conf entry:
!!spamd
daemon.err;daemon.warn;daemon.info;daemon.debug /var/log/
Op Fri, 06 Oct 2017 10:49:39 +0200 schreef rosjat :
[...]
Is there some way to get a more verbose autput when the process is
daemonized? the -v switch only seems to aplay to the foreground mode.
Depends on your syslog.conf; I have:
!!spamd
daemon.err;daemon.warn;daemon.info;daemon.debug
Try creating the file first:
$ doas touch /var/log/spamd
$ doas chmod 640 /var/log/spamd
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 05:13:02PM +0530, Hrishikesh Muruk wrote:
> almost everything works...logging to /var/log/spamd still not happening
> though I have restarted syslogd with
>
> $ rcctl restart syslogd
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 04:36:06PM +0530, Hrishikesh Muruk wrote:
Thanks for confirming, pleased to hear it.
Back out to the sun and bbq for me...
> Worked after I regenerated the key and crt file
>
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Hrishikesh Muruk wrote:
>
> > Thank you for the response. I r
Hi,
Have you tried starting spamd with -d flag, to see if there is any output?
Are any other messages in the other log files, daemon.log for example? I'm
assuming that you maybe forgot to reload/restart sysyslogd after modifying the
syslog.conf file.
Regards,
Leighton
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 05:35:13PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017-06-18, Leighton Sheppard wrote:
> > I've just changed my mail relay from Exchange Online to Gmail, seems it was
> > getting blocked.
>
> Quite likely - Microsoft's outbound mail relays don't play well with spamd.
>
>
Y
On 2017-06-18, Leighton Sheppard wrote:
> I've just changed my mail relay from Exchange Online to Gmail, seems it was
> getting blocked.
Quite likely - Microsoft's outbound mail relays don't play well with spamd.
Thank you sir. That worked. I also restarted syslogd just in case it was
required
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Leighton Sheppard <
leigh...@openbsd.leighling.co.uk> wrote:
> Try creating the file first:
>
> $ doas touch /var/log/spamd
> $ doas chmod 640 /var/log/spamd
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 18,
I've just changed my mail relay from Exchange Online to Gmail, seems it was
getting blocked.
Hopefully this works.
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 12:49:43PM +0100, Leighton Sheppard wrote:
> Try creating the file first:
>
> $ doas touch /var/log/spamd
> $ doas chmod 640 /var/log/spamd
>
>
> On Sun, J
almost everything works...logging to /var/log/spamd still not happening
though I have restarted syslogd with
$ rcctl restart syslogd
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Leighton Sheppard <
leigh...@openbsd.leighling.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 04:36:06PM +0530, Hrishikesh Muruk wrote:
Worked after I regenerated the key and crt file
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Hrishikesh Muruk wrote:
> Thank you for the response. I restarted syslogd after using
>
> $ doas rcctl restart syslogd
> syslogd(ok)
> syslogd(ok)
>
> So it should pick up the new config. Perhaps /var/log/spamd is
Thank you for the response. I restarted syslogd after using
$ doas rcctl restart syslogd
syslogd(ok)
syslogd(ok)
So it should pick up the new config. Perhaps /var/log/spamd is not created
because nothing has been logged by spamd (since it is not running)
When I run spamd with debug (thanks for
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 13:51:36 -0700
Kurt H Maier wrote:
> What I don't do it set an outgoing voicemail greeting informing
> correspondents that my time is more valuable than theirs, and if they
> want to contact me I have a list of hoops through which they must
> jump.
>
> That would make me an a
On 2017-04-21, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> What I don't do it set an outgoing voicemail greeting informing
> correspondents that my time is more valuable than theirs, and if they
> want to contact me I have a list of hoops through which they must jump.
>
> That would make me an asshole.
Heh. I do actua
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:40:42PM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 09:21:48 -0700
> Kurt H Maier wrote:
>
> > Greylisting is a hack, an abuse of a side-effect. Most such
> > approaches have deleterious side effects. This particular side
> > effect is why I don't like greylist
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 09:21:48 -0700
Kurt H Maier wrote:
> Greylisting is a hack, an abuse of a side-effect. Most such
> approaches have deleterious side effects. This particular side
> effect is why I don't like greylisting in general, even though it's
> fairly effective.
Do you answer your pho
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017-04-21, Craig Skinner wrote:
> > Email is not instant messaging.
> >
> > Customers need educated to that fact.
>
> How do you educate them to that when they send to their gmail account
> and it shows up on their phone within seconds?
We, at school, used the pen
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 04:02:20PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017-04-21, Craig Skinner wrote:
> > Hi Markus,
> >
> > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 11:25:14 +0200 Markus Rosjat wrote:
> >> so if you have spamd in place in greylisting mode and you have
> >> customers that work with people who use Of
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 16:02:20 + (UTC)
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> >
> > Email is not instant messaging.
> >
> > Customers need educated to that fact.
>
> How do you educate them to that when they send to their gmail account
> and it shows up on their phone within seconds?
>
> Sometimes there
Like I said I had one case where I had the same message send from 20 different
outlook.com servers that's just stupid
Regards
Markus
Ursprüngliche Nachricht
Von: Edgar Pettijohn
Datum: 21.04.17 15:20 (GMT+01:00)
An: misc@openbsd.org
Betreff: Re: spamd and outloo
On 2017-04-21, Craig Skinner wrote:
> Hi Markus,
>
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 11:25:14 +0200 Markus Rosjat wrote:
>> so if you have spamd in place in greylisting mode and you have
>> customers that work with people who use Office365 as a service you
>> will get calls that emails are delayed for a freak
On 2017-04-21, Markus Rosjat wrote:
> so if you have spamd in place in greylisting mode and you have customers
> that work with people who use Office365 as a service you will get calls
> that emails are delayed for a freaking long time and if you check the ip
> range that outlook.com could send
Op Fri, 21 Apr 2017 14:12:56 +0200 schreef Reyk Floeter :
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:52:05PM +0200, Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote:
Op Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:16:31 +0200 schreef Reyk Floeter
:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:59:20AM +0200, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:25:14AM
Op Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:16:31 +0200 schreef Reyk Floeter :
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:59:20AM +0200, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:25:14AM +0200, Markus Rosjat wrote:
>
I use the attached script to fetch the SPF entries recursively, in a
plain text format that can be fe
On 04/21/17 07:12, Reyk Floeter wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:52:05PM +0200, Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote:
Op Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:16:31 +0200 schreef Reyk Floeter :
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:59:20AM +0200, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:25:14AM +0200, Markus Rosjat w
And apropos of the subject, quite on-topic:
https://home.nuug.no/~peter/dmarc-reject_openbsd-misc_spadm_and_spf.txt
- P (pats robot on virtual head)
--
Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team
http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/
"Rem
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:52:05PM +0200, Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote:
> Op Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:16:31 +0200 schreef Reyk Floeter :
> > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:59:20AM +0200, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:25:14AM +0200, Markus Rosjat wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > I use the a
Hello Peter/all,
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 11:59:20 +0200 "Peter N. M. Hansteen" wrote:
>
> start with
>
> $ host -ttxt outlook.com
>
> and follow the includes to the very end. Then weep.
>
In February 2015 Paul de Weerd calculated Google published 217,088 IPv4
addresses, and 29,710,560,942,849,12
Hi Markus,
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 11:25:14 +0200 Markus Rosjat wrote:
> so if you have spamd in place in greylisting mode and you have
> customers that work with people who use Office365 as a service you
> will get calls that emails are delayed for a freaking long time
Email is not instant messaging
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:59:20AM +0200, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:25:14AM +0200, Markus Rosjat wrote:
> >
> > so if you have spamd in place in greylisting mode and you have customers
> > that work with people who use Office365 as a service you will get calls that
>
hey peter,
like your pf book very much helped me a lot to grasp some stuff :)
fot the host solution I already did this but skiped the part with
following the includes.
MS is providing a list of there possible ip ranges here
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn163583(v=exchg.150).a
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:25:14AM +0200, Markus Rosjat wrote:
>
> so if you have spamd in place in greylisting mode and you have customers
> that work with people who use Office365 as a service you will get calls that
> emails are delayed for a freaking long time and if you check the ip range
> t
Op Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:25:30 +0100 schreef Mik J :
Spamd has been really efficient in blocking spam. A few of them passed
through once in a while but there's no discomfort.
So this is not really an OpenSMTPd question.
But, I'm not able to use spamtrap.
# spamdb -T -a ""
The example in the
Thanks again Otto,
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 04:27:33PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
| If spamd -d doesn't want to delete the entry either try rebulding the
| db by making a script that calls spamdb -a on a new db file for all
| the ip's.
Yep, I went that route. Grabbed the whitelisted IPs from the
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 04:20:44PM +0100, Paul de Weerd wrote:
> Hi Otto, thanks for replying!
>
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 04:08:51PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> | > [weerd@despair] $ spamdb | wc -l
> | > 553
> | > [weerd@despair] $ ls -lh /var/db/spamd
> | > -rw-r--r-- 1 _spamd _spamd
Hi Otto, thanks for replying!
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 04:08:51PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
| > [weerd@despair] $ spamdb | wc -l
| > 553
| > [weerd@despair] $ ls -lh /var/db/spamd
| > -rw-r--r-- 1 _spamd _spamd 305M Feb 22 15:40 /var/db/spamd
| >
| > Any pointers?
|
| Berkeley db's a
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 03:42:07PM +0100, Paul de Weerd wrote:
> I've been paying a bit more attention to what spamdb is logging these
> days and I've noticed the following:
>
> [weerd@despair] $ grep spamd /var/log/messages | tail -n4
> 2017-02-22T12:23:47.518Z despair spamd[93281]: can't delete
Op Mon, 16 Jan 2017 16:26:25 +0100 schreef Harald Dunkel
:
On 01/16/17 13:58, Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote:
Op Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:08:06 +0100 schreef Harald Dunkel
:
But spamd's blacklisting (without "-b") lacks proper documen-
tation. spamd-setup(8) says that it sends blacklist data to
spamd, b
On 01/16/17 13:58, Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote:
> Op Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:08:06 +0100 schreef Harald Dunkel
> :
>>
>> But spamd's blacklisting (without "-b") lacks proper documen-
>> tation. spamd-setup(8) says that it sends blacklist data to
>> spamd, but it doesn't tell the details.
>
> Which detail
Op Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:08:06 +0100 schreef Harald Dunkel
:
Hi folks,
I am running spamd for greylisting on my MTA for several
years. I also know how to use spamd for blacklist-only mode
and how to configure pf.conf accordingly (even though I never
tried).
But spamd's blacklisting (without "-b")
On 2016-12-16 Clint Pachl wrote:
[...]
> What would be
> best is if we could blacklist these spammers upon first connection
I also wanted to just-in-time decisions, but with dnswl lookups.
I wrote a program to intercept incoming, unknown smtp connections and
do a dnswl lookup to whitelist them j
Op Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:31:05 +0100 schreef Clint Pachl
:
[...]
grep "^GREY" |
tr "|" "\t" |
[...]
I've learned to do all parsing of /var/db/spamd via the interface
as the envelope-from sometimes contains a "|" (pipe) character.
--
Gemaakt met Opera's e-mailprogramma: http://www.opera.com
Op Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:51:19 +0100 schreef Clint Pachl
:
Devin Reade wrote on 12/19/16 12:59:
With respect to dealing with SPF, the simple solution (permitting an
IP if it is on the sending domain's SPF list) doesn't work too well
in the general case since it appears many spammers publish SPF r
Hello Clint,
On Fri, 16 Dec 2016 07:21:47 -0700 Clint Pachl wrote:
> I would like to share my 45-day experience with running spamd and my
> observations and how I'm allowing mail from SMTP clusters to bypass
> spamd. Feedback and discussion would be greatly appreciated.
>
spamd in greylisting
Devin Reade wrote on 12/19/16 12:59:
You might also want to look at bgp-spamd.
Yes, this was on my radar for quite some time. However, my simple spamd
setup with assistance from the zen.spamhaus.org DNSBL has been extremely
effective. It's nice to know we've got more big guns if needed.
W
Some have requested my scripts and configurations so here it is. Below
you fill find the spamd-dnsbl and spamclusterd scripts that are used for
blacklisting spammers and whitelisting networks, respectively. Also
included is dnsbl-check which I use for testing IPs against multiple DNSBLs.
In th
You might also want to look at bgp-spamd.
With respect to dealing with SPF, the simple solution (permitting an
IP if it is on the sending domain's SPF list) doesn't work too well
in the general case since it appears many spammers publish SPF records.
However what I found works well, at least for
of -Y and
> -y (no sync proc in ps list)
> - the 5.0 machines are not using spamd.key :(
>
> I'm glad it is all well documented
>
> Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 12:14:18 +0100
> From: Craig Skinner
> To: misc@openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: spamd question
> Message-ID:
14:18 +0100
From: Craig Skinner
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: spamd question
Message-ID: <20160909121418.3117d12f@fir.internal>
Hi Kasper,
On Thu, 8 Sep 2016 17:51:45 +0200 Kasper Haitsma wrote:
> >> 5.9 -> 5.9 nothing at all
> >
> > Fix this problem first.
&g
Hi Kasper,
On Thu, 8 Sep 2016 17:51:45 +0200 Kasper Haitsma wrote:
> >> 5.9 -> 5.9 nothing at all
> >
> > Fix this problem first.
>
> if this is fixed, I trust, all is fixed.
Hopefully it's on to happy days then!!!
As you've got spamd_flags=" -y bge1 & -Y bge1"
Try changing the bge1 to ip
>> 5.9 -> 5.9 nothing at all
>
> Fix this problem first.
if this is fixed, I trust, all is fixed.
>>
>> pf.conf is the same on all 4 boxes
>
> spamd's pf rules changed in 5.8:
> http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade58.html
well http://www.openbsd.org/plus58.html reveals:
Change in spamd(8) to u
1 - 100 of 792 matches
Mail list logo
