Am 10.05.2012 21:28, schrieb Jozsef Kadlecsik:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012, Robert Schetterer wrote:
>
>> Am 10.05.2012 19:09, schrieb john:
>>>
>>> I/we use Squirrelmail and while we have not had any problems with it I
>>> wonder (and as this is this list seems to be the home of email gurus) if
>>> the
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 11:29:01 -0400, Rod K wrote:
> Was wondering if anyone would be willing to share what DNSBL and
> weights they are using with Postscreen.
Mine are adapted from a previous post by /dev/rob0:
postscreen_dnsbl_threshold = 3
postscreen_dnsbl_sites =
zen.spamhaus.org*3
b.bar
On Sun, 2012-05-06 at 09:43:07 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> ...
> > > By the way, what is going on with your DNS? Why do both DNSBL replies
> > > arrive (almost) simultaneously after two seconds?
>
> My bad. postscreen reports 'DNSBL rank' after two seconds.
Phew. At least we're on the same pag
Den 2012-05-10 16:21, DTNX Postmaster skrev:
If they even read the error message to begin with, heh.
do one need to know how to change a wheel on a wagon to drive it ? :=)
Den 2012-05-10 14:40, James Seymour skrev:
Eh? Explain, please?
check_policy_service must be after reject_unlisted_recipient
# example fault
check_policy_service inet:10.3.19.214:10031
reject_unlisted_recipient
if port 10031 is a greylist daemon it will greylist users that does not
exists
Sorry about the top post, but i wanted to give anybody who looked the
earliest opportunity to skip as I was off topic.
Perhaps I should have started a new thread.
John A
On Thu, 10 May 2012, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Jozsef Kadlecsik :
>
> > I dunno. We had the newest squirrelmail (1.4.22) and still two times user
> > sessions were hijacked and used for spamming. The users could not recall
> > what they exactly did, unfortunately.
>
> Only thing one can do a
Le 10/05/2012 19:09, john a écrit :
> Off topic, but related to this thread.
>
> I/we use Squirrelmail and while we have not had any problems with it I
> wonder (and as this is this list seems to be the home of email gurus) if
> there are any recommendations as to a better solution, particularly o
* Jozsef Kadlecsik :
> I dunno. We had the newest squirrelmail (1.4.22) and still two times user
> sessions were hijacked and used for spamming. The users could not recall
> what they exactly did, unfortunately.
Only thing one can do against this is two-factor auth (assuming nobody
can circumve
On Thu, 10 May 2012, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Am 10.05.2012 19:09, schrieb john:
> >
> > I/we use Squirrelmail and while we have not had any problems with it I
> > wonder (and as this is this list seems to be the home of email gurus) if
> > there are any recommendations as to a better solution,
Am 10.05.2012 19:09, schrieb john:
> Off topic, but related to this thread.
>
> I/we use Squirrelmail and while we have not had any problems with it I
> wonder (and as this is this list seems to be the home of email gurus) if
> there are any recommendations as to a better solution, particularly on
Off topic, but related to this thread.
I/we use Squirrelmail and while we have not had any problems with it I
wonder (and as this is this list seems to be the home of email gurus) if
there are any recommendations as to a better solution, particularly one
that would work in a postfix/dovecote e
On May 10, 2012, at 14:40, James Seymour wrote:
> On Wed, 09 May 2012 01:22:27 +0200
> Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
>> Den 2012-05-08 15:43, Jona - DTNX Postmaster skrev:
>>
>>> The '550 ... rejected:' is Postfix, the rest is the reply Postfix
>>> got from the SPF policy daemon. Customizing that rep
Hi Wietse,
Sorry, I am properly chastised. I simply did not see that link in the
comments.
On 05/10/2012 08:45 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Dennis Putnam:
Hi Wietse,
Sorry for not being clear but I was not asking what those parameters
should be but rather if they even need to be specified. I wa
Dennis Putnam:
> Hi Wietse,
>
> Sorry for not being clear but I was not asking what those parameters
> should be but rather if they even need to be specified. I was referring
If you don't specify a parameter, it gets a built-in default setting
(see "postconf -d parametername").
Again, if I kne
Am 10.05.2012 11:57, schrieb Giuseppe Perna:
> perhaps using the webmail with this ip 176.61.140.133
> BE80AB81E65:
> message-id=<62105.176.61.140.133.1336457923.squirrel@176.61.140.133>
your squirrelmail may get hacked by old version bugs and or php bugs
and using binary postfix sendmail for sen
On Wed, 09 May 2012 01:22:27 +0200
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Den 2012-05-08 15:43, Jona - DTNX Postmaster skrev:
>
> > The '550 ... rejected:' is Postfix, the rest is the reply Postfix
> > got from the SPF policy daemon. Customizing that reply may be
> > another option to clarify what is happening
Hi Wietse,
Sorry for not being clear but I was not asking what those parameters
should be but rather if they even need to be specified. I was referring
to the comments in the generic file that refers to them. It was not
clear if I needed to really set them or not in order for the generic
hash
Giuseppe Perna:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> thanks for repaly,
> this is log foe webmail:
>
> 176.61.140.133 - - [08/May/2012:08:18:41 +0200] "GET
> /src/compose.php?mail_sent=yes HTTP/1.1" 200 556825
> "https://webmail.esempio.it/src/compose.php"; "Opera/9.80 (Windows NT
>
Dennis Putnam:
> Hi Wietse,
>
> That was the missing piece that got left out in my migration. I would
> like to clean up that old version and I see that you wrote the comments
> in the generic installed file so I have a question as I am not sure I
> completely understand the function.
>
> Esse
Am 10.05.2012 14:10, schrieb Giuseppe Perna:
> thanks for repaly,
> this is log foe webmail:
>
> 176.61.140.133 - - [08/May/2012:08:18:41 +0200] "GET
> /src/compose.php?mail_sent=yes HTTP/1.1" 200 556825
> "https://webmail.esempio.it/src/compose.php"; "Opera/9.80 (Windows NT
> 6.1; U; en) Presto
thanks for repaly,
this is log foe webmail:
176.61.140.133 - - [08/May/2012:08:18:41 +0200] "GET
/src/compose.php?mail_sent=yes HTTP/1.1" 200 556825
"https://webmail.esempio.it/src/compose.php"; "Opera/9.80 (Windows NT
6.1; U; en) Presto/2.10.229 Version/11.61"
176.61.140.133 - - [08/May/2012:08:1
Hi Wietse,
That was the missing piece that got left out in my migration. I would
like to clean up that old version and I see that you wrote the comments
in the generic installed file so I have a question as I am not sure I
completely understand the function.
Essentially I want any outgoing l
Giuseppe Perna:
> this is log for /var/log/mailllog:
> May 8 08:18:41 neruda postfix/smtpd[3062]: BE80AB81E65:
> client=localhost[127.0.0.1]
> May 8 08:18:43 neruda postfix/cleanup[3208]: BE80AB81E65:
> message-id=<62105.176.61.140.133.1336457923.squirrel@176.61.140.133>
...
> perhaps using the w
hy,
thanks for replay.
my server postfix use smarthost "smart-relay.mail.inet.it"
the relay has been blocked because the address generated spam from:
freeelo...@hotmail.it
this is log for /var/log/mailllog:
May 8 08:18:41 neruda postfix/smtpd[3062]: BE80AB81E65:
client=localhost[127.0.0.1]
May 8
25 matches
Mail list logo
