Hi, Noel and Victor
Thank you very much for your precious informations.
I got it.
Maybe I just have to use body_checks against broken format..
regards,
isobetti
--- postfix-users@postfix.org ---
>On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:12:08AM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
>
>> Anything else is just body text,
When their servers are experiencing an "outage" , I see:
Oct 28 09:04:46 mta1 postfix/smtp[18570]: connect to
wec-imail3.bank.com[xxx.xxx.91.93]: Connection refused (port 25)
Oct 28 09:04:46 mta1 postfix/smtp[18570]: connect to
wec-imail2.bank.com[xxx.xxx.91.92]: Connection refused (port 25)
Oct 2
Vintinner, M. Scott:
> One of our very important clients (a major bank), is having ongoing
> problems with denial-of-service style dictionary SPAM attacks. Their
> anti-spam/firewall teams are slow to respond to these outbreaks, so
> there may be periods of several hours where we will get frequen
Brian Evans - Postfix List schrieb:
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>> Hi @ll,
>> has anbody experience with
>> postfix behind load balancers
>> im planning to test
>> ha-proxy
>> pen
>> balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster
>> in front of postfix servers
>>
>
> The pro's and con's of load bal
Vintinner, M. Scott wrote:
One of our very important clients (a major bank), is having ongoing
problems with denial-of-service style dictionary SPAM attacks. Their
anti-spam/firewall teams are slow to respond to these outbreaks, so
there may be periods of several hours where we will get frequen
Dave Chinner:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:37:58AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Eric Sandeen:
> > > > This
> > > > would violate a basic requirement of Postfix (don't lose data after
> > > > fsync). Postfix updates existing files all the time: it updates
> > > > queue files as it marks recipien
One of our very important clients (a major bank), is having ongoing
problems with denial-of-service style dictionary SPAM attacks. Their
anti-spam/firewall teams are slow to respond to these outbreaks, so
there may be periods of several hours where we will get frequent
connection refused messages
?li?s Tam?s:
> Udv / Greetings!
>
> it is already set to 30 with
>
> default_process_limit = 30
>
> I constantly get the errors:
>
> Oct 31 16:25:20 *** postfix/qmgr[7260]: warning: connect to transport
> maildrop: Resource temporarily unavailable
> Oct 31 16:25:20 *** postfix/qmgr[7260]: warn
Udv / Greetings!
it is already set to 30 with
default_process_limit = 30
I constantly get the errors:
Oct 31 16:25:20 *** postfix/qmgr[7260]: 870C2100BC0: from=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
size=7595, nrcpt=2 (queue active)
Oct 31 16:25:20 *** postfix/qmgr[7260]: warning: connect to transport maildrop:
Asai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John Peach wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:09:37 + (UTC)
Duane Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Responding to the original message...
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Asai wrote:
[snip]
"They may be having issues or you m
* kj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Victor Duchovni wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 07:50:07PM +, kj wrote:
>>
>> Next edition of which book?
>>
>>
> Ralph and Patrick's book :)
>
> The Book Of Postfix: http://www.postfix-book.com
We are working on a new edition as I write. Yet, things are still
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 07:50:07PM +, kj wrote:
Next edition of which book?
Ralph and Patrick's book :)
The Book Of Postfix: http://www.postfix-book.com
http://marc.info/?l=postfix-users&m=117079476419038&w=2
--kj
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:29:04 -0700
Asai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Peach wrote:
> > On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:09:37 + (UTC)
> > Duane Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Responding to the original message...
> >>
> >> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Asai wrote:
> >>
> >>
> > [snip]
>
John Peach wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:09:37 + (UTC)
Duane Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Responding to the original message...
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Asai wrote:
[snip]
"They may be having issues or you may be on their private blacklist."
worldswidedomainnames.com isn't
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:09:37 + (UTC)
Duane Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Responding to the original message...
>
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Asai wrote:
>
[snip]
>"They may be having issues or you may be on their private blacklist."
>
> worldswidedomainnames.com isn't even a registered d
Asai wrote:
Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/31/2008, Asai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, permit_mynetworks,
reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_unknown_sender_domain, permit
I do believe this m
Responding to the original message...
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Asai wrote:
Greetings. I've got this log entry over the past few days at the same time
I've been getting this
really strange spam from "worldswidedomainnames.com". This entry is appearing
50 or 60 times per day
in the logs:
1 Oct
Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/31/2008, Asai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, permit_mynetworks,
reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_unknown_sender_domain, permit
I do believe this makes you an o
> > postfix/smtpd[19545]: warning: unknown[xxx.yyy.www.zzz]: SASL LOGIN
> > authentication failed: authentication failure
>
> I do get those all the time. Users mistyping their passwords,
> usernames, client's getting AUTH all wrong and so on.
OK.
> > then
> >
> > postfix/smtpd[19545]: lost con
On 10/31/2008 12:54 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
> Charles Marcus wrote:
>> On 10/31/2008, Asai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>
>>> smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, permit_mynetworks,
>>> reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_unknown_sender_domain, permit
>> I do believe
Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 10/31/2008, Asai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>> smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, permit_mynetworks,
>> reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_unknown_sender_domain, permit
>>
> I do believe this makes you an open relay...
>
No... smtpd_sender_re
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/31/2008 12:37 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/31/2008, Asai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, permit_mynetworks,
reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_unknown_sender_domain, permit
I do believe this makes
On 10/31/2008 12:37 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 10/31/2008, Asai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, permit_mynetworks,
>> reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_unknown_sender_domain, permit
> I do believe this makes you an open relay...
Oh...
add 'r
On 10/31/2008, Asai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, permit_mynetworks,
> reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_unknown_sender_domain, permit
I do believe this makes you an open relay...
--
Best regards,
Charles
Duane Hill wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Asai wrote:
Greetings. I've got this log entry over the past few days at the
same time I've been getting this
really strange spam from "worldswidedomainnames.com". This entry is
appearing 50 or 60 times per day
in the logs:
1 Oct 30 18:59:19 triata
Asai wrote:
> Greetings. I've got this log entry over the past few days at the same
> time I've been getting this really strange spam from
> "worldswidedomainnames.com". This entry is appearing 50 or 60 times
> per day in the logs:
>
> 1 Oct 30 18:59:19 triata postfix/smtp[14090]: EADE6FD8084:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Asai wrote:
Greetings. I've got this log entry over the past few days at the same time
I've been getting this
really strange spam from "worldswidedomainnames.com". This entry is appearing
50 or 60 times per day
in the logs:
1 Oct 30 18:59:19 triata postfix/smtp[14090]
Jaap Westerbeek wrote:
Hi All,
Lately some spammer has been able to relay spam through my server.
I think they use a valid (hacked) account and then rewrite the sender
e-mail address.
My setup is :
Debian Etch server
postfix-mysql 2.3.8-2+etch1
amavisd-new-2.6.1
spamassass
Eric Sandeen:
> > This
> > would violate a basic requirement of Postfix (don't lose data after
> > fsync). Postfix updates existing files all the time: it updates
> > queue files as it marks recipients as done, and it updates mailbox
> > files as it appends mail.
>
> As long as postfix is looking
Greetings. I've got this log entry over the past few days at the same
time I've been getting this really strange spam from
"worldswidedomainnames.com". This entry is appearing 50 or 60 times per
day in the logs:
1 Oct 30 18:59:19 triata postfix/smtp[14090]: EADE6FD8084: host
mx.wmint.net[
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:12:08AM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
> Anything else is just body text, even if it looks like a header.
>
> Standard bounces come with the original headers as an attached
> message; they can be examined by nested_header_checks. Some
> bounces arrive with the original heade
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But some mails which should be caught by nested_header_checks or
> mime_header_checks can't help but go through my filter for some reason.
> And I don't know why..
>
> However, I found a difference between mails which my filter could catch and
> mails which my filter c
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Wietse Venema wrote:
would violate a basic requirement of Postfix (don't lose data after
fsync). Postfix updates existing files all the time: it updates
queue files as it marks recipients as done, and it updates mailbox
files as it appends mail.
If there is a response y
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Rocco Scappatura
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
>
> postfix/smtpd[19545]: disconnect from unknown[xxx.yyy.www.zzz]
>
> But I think that - being "authentication failure" a warning, the smtp
> dialog shoulnt be broken.
>
> Then I ask why the connection with the client
* Rocco Scappatura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After connection, in mail log, I get:
>
> postfix/smtpd[19545]: warning: unknown[xxx.yyy.www.zzz]: SASL LOGIN
> authentication failed: authentication failure
I do get those all the time. Users mistyping their passwords,
usernames, client's getting A
> I'm facing a problem with a client that can't send email trough my
mail
> gateway..
>
> After connection, in mail log, I get:
>
> postfix/smtpd[19545]: warning: unknown[xxx.yyy.www.zzz]: SASL LOGIN
> authentication failed: authentication failure
>
> then
>
> postfix/smtpd[19545]: lost connect
On Friday 31 October 2008 13:22:27 Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
> > Hi @ll,
> > has anbody experience with
> > postfix behind load balancers
> > im planning to test
> > ha-proxy
> > pen
> > balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster
> > in front of postfix servers
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Wietse Venema wrote:
Justin Piszcz:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Wietse Venema wrote:
Does XFS still overwrite existing files with zeros, when those
files were open for write at the time of unclean shutdown? This
I believe this was fixed in an early 2.6.2x release, cc'ing xf
Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Hi @ll,
> has anbody experience with
> postfix behind load balancers
> im planning to test
> ha-proxy
> pen
> balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster
> in front of postfix servers
>
The pro's and con's of load balancing has been discussed many times
here. Search
Hi @ll,
has anbody experience with
postfix behind load balancers
im planning to test
ha-proxy
pen
balance(ng) on ubuntu hardy in a HA-Cluster
in front of postfix servers
--
Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
Germany/Munich/Bavaria
Justin Piszcz:
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Does XFS still overwrite existing files with zeros, when those
> > files were open for write at the time of unclean shutdown? This
> I believe this was fixed in an early 2.6.2x release, cc'ing xfs mailing
> list to confirm.
>
> >
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Wietse Venema wrote:
Does XFS still overwrite existing files with zeros, when those
files were open for write at the time of unclean shutdown? This
I believe this was fixed in an early 2.6.2x release, cc'ing xfs mailing
list to confirm.
would violate a basic requiremen
Jaap Westerbeek:
> Hi All,
>
> Lately some spammer has been able to relay spam through my server.
> I think they use a valid (hacked) account and then rewrite the sender
> e-mail address.
I suggest that you identify the broken application or the comprimised
account (use weblogs and mail logs)
Nikita Kipriyanov:
> DULMANDAKH Sukhbaatar ?:
> > For me XFS seemed very fast. But usually I use ext3, which is proven
> > to be stable enough for most situations.
> >
> >
> >
> I feel also that xfs if much faster than ext3 and reiserfs, especially
> when it deals with metadata. In some bul
Hi All,
Lately some spammer has been able to relay spam through my server.
I think they use a valid (hacked) account and then rewrite the sender
e-mail address.
My setup is :
Debian Etch server
postfix-mysql 2.3.8-2+etch1
amavisd-new-2.6.1
spamassassin
cyrus imap serv
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hemanth Gopal schrieb:
| Dear all,
|
| Is that possible to implement phpldapadmin phamm or puma on
| jamm.schema currently implemented for postfix+ldap in the server. Can
| some one give me helpful urls or steps for configuring phpldapadmin
| using th
ok I tried it but not work well.
My postfix version is 2.3.8-2
this is my configuration:
queue_directory = /var/spool/postfix
mail_owner = postfix
myhostname = test.pippo.it
myorigin = $myhostname
inet_interfaces = $myhost
Wietse Venema wrote:
Bryan Irvine:
How long ago was that? I had the precise problem and had been told
that particular bug has been fixed. My problems were ~5 years ago.
Except that I'm never going to use it anyway because I just can't
force myself to trust it. I've used Postfix under ext3,
> I'm facing a problem with a client that can't send email trough my
mail
> gateway..
>
> After connection, in mail log, I get:
>
> postfix/smtpd[19545]: warning: unknown[xxx.yyy.www.zzz]: SASL LOGIN
> authentication failed: authentication failure
>
> then
>
> postfix/smtpd[19545]: lost connect
Gabriele Di Giambelardini пишет:
Hi to all
I have a problem with my configuration, I don't found any solution on internet.
My problem is:
I'd need some of my users can't send email to other domain, but only to my
domain...
Some body know the way??
thanks
Have you tried
http://www.postfix.org
Hi to all
I have a problem with my configuration, I don't found any solution on internet.
My problem is:
I'd need some of my users can't send email to other domain, but only to my
domain...
Some body know the way??
thanks
Hi,
I'd like to implement an automatic whitelisting of outgoing addresses
(people I write to should be able to pass my heavy spam filter).
For a year I've been testing a minimal, proof-of-concept, whitelisting
script (see below) but haven't maintained or improved it. What I'd like
ideally is have
52 matches
Mail list logo
