21.10.09, 19:30, "Wietse Venema" :
> devel anaconda:
> > Hi everybody!
> >
> > I have installed postfix-2.5.6 system on my server and I have a question.
> > There is one alias, that delivers messages to local bash script via pipe:
> >
> > user: |/my/script.sh
> >
> > And I want to have beha
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, johnea wrote:
> OT?: I commented out the: # -o milter_macro_daemon_name=ORIGINATING
> since this wasn't a listed value for this parameter in the docs,
> and I wasn't sure what that line was doing.
If you do not use milters, then you can safely ignore this.
> The m
On 10/21/09 17:47, Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, johnea wrote:
Generally, the output of 'postconf -n' is preferred in lieu of snippets
or entire main.cf dumps.
Next time, exclude the comments. :)
Will do, thank you for those tips
What ever you decide, just make sure to use re
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, johnea wrote:
> However I had trouble for the first time today configuring a client
> for the submission port. Mail from this client is rejected with:
>
> Oct 21 13:11:31 atom postfix/smtpd[8849]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> x[aa.bb.cc.dd]: 504 5.5.2 : Helo command rejec
Alejandro Esteban Galvez:
> Hi! Somebody can tell me where postfix save the queues
http://www.postfix.org/OVERVIEW.html
Hi! Somebody can tell me where postfix save the queues
bye
--
Este mensaje le ha llegado mediante el servicio de correo electronico que
ofrece Infomed para respaldar el cumplimiento de las misiones del Sistema
Nacional de Salud. La persona que envia este correo asume el compromiso de usar
Hello,
Earlier this year I split submissions from inbound smtp.
This has yielded a great improvement in authenticating users and
allowing more aggressive smtp rejection.
However I had trouble for the first time today configuring a client
for the submission port. Mail from this client is reject
devel anaconda:
> Hi everybody!
>
> I have installed postfix-2.5.6 system on my server and I have a question.
> There is one alias, that delivers messages to local bash script via pipe:
>
> user: |/my/script.sh
>
> And I want to have behaviour, when script fails (for some reasons) and such
>
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Mark Goodge :
I agree. Sender verification has its uses, but it is *not* suitable
for use as an anti-spam tool on inbound email. At least one major
webmail provider is known to blacklist hosts that employ it
excessively.
So use it selectively only.
or use a third p
mouss schrieb:
the user can simply send any messages he wants with a tcp connection. so
what's the problem?
A problem arises when an antrusted user is enabled to send any message
he wants over that tcp connection. Imagine you create a cgi script that
relies on the code in my earlier posting
Hi everybody!
I have installed postfix-2.5.6 system on my server and I have a question. There
is one alias, that delivers messages to local bash script via pipe:
user: |/my/script.sh
And I want to have behaviour, when script fails (for some reasons) and such
messages should be deferred, not b
Victor,
Thanks a lot for your reply. Let me answer your questions.
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:25:20PM +0200, Roland Dirlewanger wrote:
I would like to set up TLS on our mail server the following way :
* connections to port 25 may use TLS. If TLS is used, our server should
mouss:
> Oliver Block a ?crit :
> > Wietse Venema schrieb:
> >> That depends on how the Postfix sendmail command is invoked,
> >> and you failed to supply that information.
> >>
> >> If invoked as "sendmail -bs", then the "." SEPARATES messages as
> >> defined in the SMTP protocol.
> >>
> >> If inv
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:34:19PM +0200, Magnus B?ck wrote:
> SELECT address, '%...@sms.example.com' FROM table WHERE column = '%s'
>
Note, this pulls '%u' from the localpart of the lookup address (%s).
If the lookup result does not always have the same localpart, and
you want the localpart of
Oliver Block a écrit :
> Wietse Venema schrieb:
>> That depends on how the Postfix sendmail command is invoked,
>> and you failed to supply that information.
>>
>> If invoked as "sendmail -bs", then the "." SEPARATES messages as
>> defined in the SMTP protocol.
>>
>> If invoked as "sendmail -i", th
ram a écrit :
> A lotus notes server of our clients in hugely misconfigured to send just
> a empty HELO. And we are supposed to relay mails for this client.
>
> I know getting the lotus admin to set his MTA is the right thing , but
> we for now I want to accept the null HELO
>
> how do I do thi
suomi a écrit :
> Hi listers
> maildir creation problem:
>
> Oct 20 10:36:43 myhost postfix/virtual[10041]: warning: maildir access
> problem for UID/GID=89/89: create maildir file
> /data/postfix/maildrop//mydomain/anax/tmp/1256027803.P10041.myhost.mydomain.com:
> Permission denied
> Oct 20 10:3
On Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 19:43 CEST,
rihad wrote:
> OK here's how far I've gone:
>
> master.cf:
> smsnotif unix - n n - - pipe
> flags=DRhu user=vmail argv=/root/smsnotif ${recipient}
>
> /root/smsnotif:
> #!/bin/sh
> echo "$@" >> /tmp/smsnotif.lo
On Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 18:49 CEST,
MySQL Student wrote:
> > This syntax requires that smtpd_access_maps IS NOT listed in
> > parent_domain_matches_subdomains. If you stick to the default
> > value, drop the initial dot in .example.com to match example.com
> > and all subdomains.
>
> /etc/postfix/main.cf
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> ...
> reject_unauth_destination
> check_recipient_access hash:/etc/postfix/recipient_whitelist
> ...greylisting here...
>
> And put "address OK" in the whitelist.
I'll give that a try. I think the problem
Gary Smith:
> I'm implementing grey listing and a few RBL's on our relays. The
> problem is when our sending users get blacklisted on their email
> or something happens in which they still need to email us, we
> would like to be able to bypass the grey listing and possibly the
> RBL's.
>
> I woul
rihad:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> rihad wrote:
> > We have two maps:
> > virtual_mailbox_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual-maps.cf
> > virtual_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual.cf
> >
> >
> > /etc/postfix/mysql-virtual-maps.cf:
> > user = postfix
> > password
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:27:57PM -0500, Jim Rupprecht wrote:
> relay_recipient_maps = proxy:ldap:/postfix/etc/ldap_lookup.cf
Change to:
relay_recipient_maps =
proxy:ldap:/postfix/etc/ldap_lookup.cf,
hash:/etc/postfix/non-ldap-relay-recipients
In that table:
/etc/postf
I'm implementing grey listing and a few RBL's on our relays. The problem is
when our sending users get blacklisted on their email or something happens in
which they still need to email us, we would like to be able to bypass the grey
listing and possibly the RBL's.
I would like to do this for p
rihad wrote:
We have two maps:
virtual_mailbox_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual-maps.cf
virtual_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual.cf
/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual-maps.cf:
user = postfix
password = c00lpass
dbname = mail
table = users
select_field = maildir
where_field = email
additi
I'm running postfix as a mail gateway for my campus. I want to direct
all inbound SMTP traffic from the world through the gateway systems.
There are about 30 mail systems on campus... one large central system
which handles 99 percent of all mail and 29 small mail systems that
either exist for a si
hi all
i've to keep two postfix mail server; one at head office and another at
regional office;
both users will be using example.com domain; head office mail server has got
hostname/ mx/rdns etc..in the public dns; head office has got seperate
internet connection
the regional office has got sepera
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 09:34:50AM -0700, Eric Vaughn wrote:
>
> We suspect a few things. It seems to be resolved now. Concurrency
> rates were greatly increased during the last test.
>
> 1) Postfix 2.6 allows for a higher per process limit. The OS "ulimit"
> by default, may not necessarily s
Hi,
>> I thought I understood how to block a specific domain from being able
>> to send mail to users on my server, but I must be doing something
>> wrong. In main.cf I have:
>>
>> check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/sender_access,
>> check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/client_access
>>
>> amo
> Move reject_unauth_destination up above these checks...
I'll address that while I'm in there as well. These were created some time ago
and I should probably spend some time today myself looking at them to make sure
they are still sane.
On 10/21/2009 12:22 PM, Gary Smith wrote:
> We have the same problem. A couple random users on the net have been
> harassing one of our email holders with lots of spam.
>
> You will need to tweak this accordingly, but this is what we have on
> our relays in the main.cf:
> smtpd_recipient_restrict
On Oct 21, 2009, at 8:50 AM, wrote:
OK, now more. Apparently there is a problem with one of my users
who is constantly being spammed by a specific remote sender. The
remote senders email is always the same and somehow gets bounced for
days in between my postfix server and my exchange b
We suspect a few things. It seems to be resolved now. Concurrency
rates were greatly increased during the last test.
1) Postfix 2.6 allows for a higher per process limit. The OS "ulimit"
by default, may not necessarily support this. The postfix processes
were running out of file descriptors.
>
> But this checks the recipient, not the sender.
>
Good catch. I didn't scroll down far enough in my main.cf. For some reason
I'm using the same access file for both. I need to fix that.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = hash:/etc/postfix/custom/access,
permit_mynetworks, reject_unknow
* Gary Smith :
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
>hash:/etc/postfix/custom/access,
>permit_mynetworks,
>reject_unknown_sender_domain,
>reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org,
>reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
>reject_rbl_client rhsbl.ahbl.org,
>reject_rbl_client dnsbl-1.uce
>
> OK, now more. Apparently there is a problem with one of my users who
> is constantly being spammed by a specific remote sender. The remote
> senders email is always the same and somehow gets bounced for days in
> between my postfix server and my exchange bridgehead. What can I do to
> just
* Mark Goodge :
> I agree. Sender verification has its uses, but it is *not* suitable
> for use as an anti-spam tool on inbound email. At least one major
> webmail provider is known to blacklist hosts that employ it
> excessively.
So use it selectively only.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereic
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/21/2009, Chris Imrie (chris.im...@abeta.co.uk) wrote:
It checks to verify the sender once, then caches the result in a
database, so mail servers aren't hassled more than once per email
address verification.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think this could still get you black
On 10/21/2009, Chris Imrie (chris.im...@abeta.co.uk) wrote:
> It checks to verify the sender once, then caches the result in a
> database, so mail servers aren't hassled more than once per email
> address verification.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think this could still get you blacklisted...
http://ww
Hi Charles
It checks to verify the sender once, then caches the result in a database, so
mail servers aren't hassled more than once per email address verification.
Regards
Chris
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf
OK, now more. Apparently there is a problem with one of my users who is
constantly being spammed by a specific remote sender. The remote senders email
is always the same and somehow gets bounced for days in between my postfix
server and my exchange bridgehead. What can I do to just delete it
On 10/21/2009, Chris Imrie (chris.im...@abeta.co.uk) wrote:
> Has worked correctly, and we're now verifying emails as they come in.
Hopefully you aren't doing this for all mail?
If so, you will very likely end up being on different blacklists for
abusing other people's servers, especially if yuou
On 10/21/2009 10:20 AM, Zachary Burns wrote:
I've received a strange request from management and I'm determined to make
it workI'm obviously running Postfix (along with ISPConfig to help
manage it with virtual domains on Ubuntu Linux), here's what they'd like to
do.
1.) Keep existing virtual
do it.
Does all this make theoretical sense? Is it possible?
Zack
__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4529 (20091021) __
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
Wietse Venema schrieb:
> That depends on how the Postfix sendmail command is invoked,
> and you failed to supply that information.
>
> If invoked as "sendmail -bs", then the "." SEPARATES messages as
> defined in the SMTP protocol.
>
> If invoked as "sendmail -i", then the "." becomes part of the m
Oliver Block:
> Wietse Venema schrieb:
> > Oliver Block:
> >
> >> Hello everyone,
> >>
> >> these days you can read dozens of articles that implitely claim that
> >> the following code will produce more than one mail message at a time
> >> if used by a malicous user.
> >>
> >> I doubt that it is
Wietse Venema schrieb:
> Oliver Block:
>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> these days you can read dozens of articles that implitely claim that
>> the following code will produce more than one mail message at a time
>> if used by a malicous user.
>>
>> I doubt that it is true, but I'd like to ask here, b
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 4:40 AM, Martin Schiøtz wrote:
>>> Can I do any outgoing spam checks with postfix or I'm forced to
>>> install lots of Amavis, spamassassin, etc. software to do that job.
>>>
>>
>> I'm sorry to tell you that blocking outbound spam is at least harder
>> than blocking inbound
Geert Hendrickx wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 06:52:21PM +0500, rihad wrote:
Geert Hendrickx wrote:
In your case (SMS notifications) however, I would keep things simple
and not try to integrate it so tightly into the delivery process, but
just fork your incoming mails to two transports: "virtu
Oliver Block:
> Hello everyone,
>
> these days you can read dozens of articles that implitely claim that
> the following code will produce more than one mail message at a time
> if used by a malicous user.
>
> I doubt that it is true, but I'd like to ask here, because you know
> your mta better t
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 06:52:21PM +0500, rihad wrote:
> Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> >In your case (SMS notifications) however, I would keep things simple
> >and not try to integrate it so tightly into the delivery process, but
> >just fork your incoming mails to two transports: "virtual" for actual
>
Geert Hendrickx wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:04:44AM +0500, rihad wrote:
in the myprog shell script, after it has done its job, how to pass
control to virtual(8)? Something like echo "OK virtual"? You're
talking to a postfix newbie facing too close a deadline, please bear
with me ;-)
You
On Oct 20, 2009, at 11:52 PM, Russell Jones wrote:
Aw. That deserves a sad face :-( .
I was hoping, since you can edit bounce.cf to say what you would
like, you could also edit the actual system error message.
Well that is what Postfix is doing: simply acting as a messenger and
reporting
Hello everyone,
these days you can read dozens of articles that implitely claim that
the following code will produce more than one mail message at a time
if used by a malicous user.
I doubt that it is true, but I'd like to ask here, because you know
your mta better than I. The c code to access po
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On 21/10/09 15:07, Wietse Venema wrote:
> 1) A baseball bat, and a strong WHACK over the idiot's head.
I like te concept. Would you consider stop working on SBTP[1] and do
SBBBWTP[2]? ;)
> 2) Changes to Postfix source code so that it accepts bad
ram:
> A lotus notes server of our clients in hugely misconfigured to send just
> a empty HELO. And we are supposed to relay mails for this client.
>
> I know getting the lotus admin to set his MTA is the right thing , but
> we for now I want to accept the null HELO
>
> how do I do this ? I alr
On 10/21/2009 7:44 AM, ram wrote:
A lotus notes server of our clients in hugely misconfigured to send just
a empty HELO. And we are supposed to relay mails for this client.
I know getting the lotus admin to set his MTA is the right thing , but
we for now I want to accept the null HELO
how do I
* ram :
> A lotus notes server of our clients in hugely misconfigured to send just
> a empty HELO. And we are supposed to relay mails for this client.
>
> I know getting the lotus admin to set his MTA is the right thing , but
> we for now I want to accept the null HELO
>
> how do I do this ? I
A lotus notes server of our clients in hugely misconfigured to send just
a empty HELO. And we are supposed to relay mails for this client.
I know getting the lotus admin to set his MTA is the right thing , but
we for now I want to accept the null HELO
how do I do this ? I already have smtpd_hel
Russell Jones:
> I have Postfix 2.3.3 installed, and am using standard file system quotas
> for users. Whenever a user receives a message and the message cannot be
> delivered to them due to being over quota, the following bounce messages
> is sent back:
>
> russell-example@server2.example.
Alberto Lepe:
> host mail.server_old.com[101.101.101.101] said: 554 5.0.0 rewrite:
> excessive recursion (max 50), ruleset canonify
That is not a POSTFIX error message.
Wietse
Hi Ralf
Your help is much appreciated, I have modified the local_recipient_maps, and
have modified the mydestination to omit the $mydomain as that was an error on
my part.
The implementation of;
Address_verify_sender = postmas...@domain.co.uk
Has worked correctly, and we're now verifying emai
* Chris Imrie :
> Hi Ralf
>
> Here's the output from 'postconf -n', we have the Sender Verify disabled
> currently while we get the address_verify_sender configured.
>
> address_verify_map = btree:/etc/postfix/verified_senders
> address_verify_negative_cache = no
> alias_database = hash:/etc/ali
Hi Ralf
Here's the output from 'postconf -n', we have the Sender Verify disabled
currently while we get the address_verify_sender configured.
address_verify_map = btree:/etc/postfix/verified_senders
address_verify_negative_cache = no
alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
alias_maps = hash:/etc/alia
* Postflick :
>
> Hi Ralf
>
> Where would these parameters be configured.
It'Äs hard to tell, it depends on other settings!
> I have not told it to use postmaster, however, using postconf, it does
> return that as the address;
>
> u...@spam {uk} [11:56:26] /etc/postfix: postconf -d address_ve
Hi Ralf
Where would these parameters be configured.
I have not told it to use postmaster, however, using postconf, it does
return that as the address;
u...@spam {uk} [11:56:26] /etc/postfix: postconf -d address_verify_sender
address_verify_sender = postmaster
I can't see any entries within 'ma
* Postflick :
>
> Hi
>
> We're recently enabled Postfix Sender Verify on our mail filtering gateway.
>
> This has worked quite well, however Postfix keeps calling back to
> mailservers using a non-fully qualified address, e.g. from=.
Because you configured it that way?
address_verify_sender
#
Hi
We're recently enabled Postfix Sender Verify on our mail filtering gateway.
This has worked quite well, however Postfix keeps calling back to
mailservers using a non-fully qualified address, e.g. from=.
This then sets off spam checks on that mailserver it's calling back to,
refuses the addre
zch.open put forth on 10/21/2009 1:45 AM:
> Thank you for your quick reply, stan!
>
> I think I failed to express my thought -_-!
>
> What I'm going to accomplish is to build a mail server in my Intranet
> using postfix. And I hope this mail server can talk to gmail or other
> e-mail server on
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:04:44AM +0500, rihad wrote:
> in the myprog shell script, after it has done its job, how to pass
> control to virtual(8)? Something like echo "OK virtual"? You're
> talking to a postfix newbie facing too close a deadline, please bear
> with me ;-)
You can't. Postfix ha
70 matches
Mail list logo
