OpenSSL 1.0.1g and Ironport SMTP appliances interop issue

2014-04-10 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
[ Original openssl-users thread subject: openssl update 1.0.1f to 1.0.1g broke sendmail ... ] In a thread on the openssl-users list there is a report of an upgrade to OpenSSL 1.0.1g (to deal with "Heartbleed") causing one Sendmail system delivery problems to a few sites. This is more noticeabl

Re: Outgoing spam problem

2014-04-10 Thread Ron Wheeler
Limit the number of destinations (recipients) allowed in an e-mail. Limit the number of e-mails per minute or half minute or whatever frequency you observe as their pattern. Put in a SPAM filter on outgoing mail and drop SPAM. Block repeated violations from from 1 IP. Just lock them out for a

Re: Asking about heartbleed

2014-04-10 Thread postfix-users
Wietse Venema wrote: OpenSSL versions prior to 1.0.1 don't have the hearbeat feature and have never been affected by this bug. ii openssl 0.9.8o-4squeeze14 Secure Socket Layer (SSL) binary and related crypto

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 05:24:54PM -0600, LuKreme wrote: > > No, the DKIM spec makes no allowance for signature delimiters. If > > the body is modified beyond adding removing whitespace (with relaxed > > canonicalization) the DKIM check fails. > > That seems like a bug in the implementation of D

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread Scott Kitterman
On April 10, 2014 7:24:54 PM EDT, LuKreme wrote: > >On 10 Apr 2014, at 17:01 , Viktor Dukhovni >wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:57:54AM +0200, li...@rhsoft.net wrote: >> That said, I thought DKIM ignored everything after the signature delimiter, so if the lists attach the footer

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread LuKreme
On 10 Apr 2014, at 17:01 , Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:57:54AM +0200, li...@rhsoft.net wrote: > >>> That said, I thought DKIM ignored everything after the signature >>> delimiter, so if the lists attach the footer *properly* it shouldn?t >>> be an issue > > No, the DKIM

Re: Outgoing spam problem

2014-04-10 Thread AFCommerce
A few things you can do: 1. Many spammers can switch their IP address but you should blacklist any ip that signs up for an account and spam, it will slow them down at least 2. The 100 cap per day is a good idea but I'd lower it to 5 messages a day, increasing by a couple messages cap per week.

Local network MX for newsletters and high volume mailing questions

2014-04-10 Thread Thijssen
Believe me, this is everything but spam-related. It's mostly .org and .edu/.gov kind of mailings (non-profit), but quite a lot of them at one time. I've seen postfix moments like this quite a lot recently: Incoming: 6991 Active: 2 Deferred: 7897 Bounced: 2319 Hold: 0 Corrupt: 0 I had to employ

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:57:54AM +0200, li...@rhsoft.net wrote: > > That said, I thought DKIM ignored everything after the signature > > delimiter, so if the lists attach the footer *properly* it shouldn?t > > be an issue No, the DKIM spec makes no allowance for signature delimiters. If the bo

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread li...@rhsoft.net
Am 11.04.2014 00:53, schrieb LuKreme: > > On 10 Apr 2014, at 09:08 , Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 06:03:51AM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: >> >>> I'm sure at least some of you have been bitten by the debacle associated >>> with Yahoo turning on strict DMARC enforcement (p

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread LuKreme
On 10 Apr 2014, at 09:08 , Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 06:03:51AM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: > >> I'm sure at least some of you have been bitten by the debacle associated >> with Yahoo turning on strict DMARC enforcement (particularly any of you who, >> like me, manage a

Re: Outgoing spam problem

2014-04-10 Thread LuKreme
On 10 Apr 2014, at 07:58 , Marcin Szymonik wrote: > Hello, > > We run a free accounts mail server (like gmail) and we struggle with the > outgoing spam problem. > Spammers abuse our service by creating accounts and then sending out spam. > > It is very easy and free to create an account and w

Re: Aliases cause policyd to miscount the number of message a user@domain sends

2014-04-10 Thread Rob Tanner
On Apr 9, 2014, at 9:17 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 02:38:32AM +, Rob Tanner wrote: > >> The policyd daemon is a perfect tool for setting quotas (i.e., number >> of message per hour, day, etc). The problem is that we depend >> heavily of Postfix's extraordinary abi

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 06:03:51AM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: > I'm sure at least some of you have been bitten by the debacle associated > with Yahoo turning on strict DMARC enforcement (particularly any of you who, > like me, manage a list server). One option is to do what the Postfix-users li

Re: Outgoing spam problem

2014-04-10 Thread Marcin Szymonik
As accounts are free and you can easily create tens of them, per account limits don't solve the problem. Most free mail service providers allow their users to send through SMTP and we would prefer to do that as well. Content based filtering may be the way to go indeed - thank you for pointing it.

Re: Outgoing spam problem

2014-04-10 Thread Nick Warr
On 10/04/2014 14:58, Marcin Szymonik wrote: Hello, We run a free accounts mail server (like gmail) and we struggle with the outgoing spam problem. Spammers abuse our service by creating accounts and then sending out spam. It is very easy and free to create an account and we want it to stay

Re: Invoking procmail with suid root

2014-04-10 Thread Arthur Dent
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:14 AM, James Cloos wrote: >> "AD" == Arthur Dent writes: > > AD> I don't want postfix to do anything other than deliver to procmail. > > Postfix works fine here for that. > > I use, in main.cf: > > mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail -pt > > and, in .fetchmailrc:

Outgoing spam problem

2014-04-10 Thread Marcin Szymonik
Hello, We run a free accounts mail server (like gmail) and we struggle with the outgoing spam problem. Spammers abuse our service by creating accounts and then sending out spam. It is very easy and free to create an account and we want it to stay that way so blocking or removing spammers acco

Re: Asking about heartbleed

2014-04-10 Thread Wietse Venema
The Heartbleed bug allows a remote attacker to read chunks of memory from a vulnerable TLS CLIENT PROCESS (e.g., smtp(8)) or TLS SERVER PROCESS (e.g., smtpd(8)). OpenSSL versions prior to 1.0.1 don't have the hearbeat feature and have never been affected by this bug. You can use forward secrecy t

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread Robert Schetterer
Am 10.04.2014 12:47, schrieb Robert Schetterer: > Am 10.04.2014 12:03, schrieb Miles Fidelman: >> Hi Folks, >> >> I'm sure at least some of you have been bitten by the debacle associated >> with Yahoo turning on strict DMARC enforcement (particularly any of you >> who, like me, manage a list server

Re: DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread Robert Schetterer
Am 10.04.2014 12:03, schrieb Miles Fidelman: > Hi Folks, > > I'm sure at least some of you have been bitten by the debacle associated > with Yahoo turning on strict DMARC enforcement (particularly any of you > who, like me, manage a list server). yes with listserver mailman, had to upgrade to ver

DKIM, DMARC, Original-Authentication-Results

2014-04-10 Thread Miles Fidelman
Hi Folks, I'm sure at least some of you have been bitten by the debacle associated with Yahoo turning on strict DMARC enforcement (particularly any of you who, like me, manage a list server). Which leads to a question: Any suggestions for how to validate a DKIM signature, and apply an Origin

Re: Asking about heartbleed

2014-04-10 Thread Jim Reid
On 10 Apr 2014, at 08:14, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: > I still wonder why OpenSSL does not use the memory wipe before free, is it a > performance killer or a feature? I imagine the OpenSSL developers didn't think this was necessary when they first started on the code 10-15 years ago and that in

Re: Asking about heartbleed

2014-04-10 Thread lst_hoe02
Zitat von Viktor Dukhovni : On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 05:54:33PM -0400, Victoriano Giralt wrote: I'd like to 'hear' Wietse's and Victor's opinion on how could this nasty bug affect a TLS service like submission? In pretty much the same way that it applies to web services. * SSL/TLS Private