John,
you might want to play around with a script I started a while ago. I don't
recall if I finished it. I think it did the job well enough to stop working on
it at that time.
p@rick
* John A @ KLaM :
> Recently there was a discussion about file permissions and ownership.
> My postfix setup i
Recently there was a discussion about file permissions and ownership.
My postfix setup is as far as I know fairly conventional Debian stretch.
/etc/postfix root root 755
Main.cf root root 644
Master.cf root root 644
/etc/postfix/maps root root 755
Map, pcre etc root root 644
/etc/postfix/sasl r
On 23 Feb 2016, at 15:44, Peter wrote:
On 23/02/16 08:57, Curtis Maurand wrote:
The problem was in the /etc/nsswitch.conf.
I changed the line
hosts: files dns
to
hosts:dns files
and that solved the trouble.
You likely want this to be, "files dns", otherwise with dns listed
On 2/23/2016 2:54 PM, Gomes, Rich wrote:
> Good day,
>
> What is the best way to accomplish the following:
> We want to block emails bound for the Internet, we have domain based rules
> already setup in the transport file for our internal domains.
> But would like email bound for any domains othe
I'll consider that too.
Thank you, again.
Marius.
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
[mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Noel Jones
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 11:53 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Feature request - blacklist che
On 2/23/2016 3:46 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Marius Gologan:
>> Hi Wietse,
>>
>> No, I don't mean the local files. Local files are effective for local
>> admins, not for the world nor a community.
>>
>> The mechanisms I have in mind are similar to:
>> reject_rhsbl_reverse_client
>> reject_rhsbl_sen
Thank you. Didn't know that and sounds very useful.
Marius.
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
[mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 11:46 PM
To: Postfix users
Subject: Re: Feature request - blacklist che
Robert Lopez:
> Discussion here about how fast we must patch glibc.
It is a bad bug. I suggest that you patch it.
Wietse
Marius Gologan:
> Hi Wietse,
>
> No, I don't mean the local files. Local files are effective for local
> admins, not for the world nor a community.
>
> The mechanisms I have in mind are similar to:
> reject_rhsbl_reverse_client
> reject_rhsbl_sender
> reject_rbl_client
> but for the corresponded
wrt: Patches are available.
We have all the patches for all our systems already down loaded. Our
concern is when we need to do the patching. Some want to take all the
colleges data center systems down to patch right away. Others want to wait
for time slots which would not take down so many systems
This one is better:
http://www.liquidweb.com/kb/protecting-against-cve-2015-7547/
From: Marius Gologan [mailto:marius.golo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 11:01 PM
To: 'Robert Lopez'; 'Postfix users'
Subject: RE: CVE-2015-7547
Patches are available for most Linux distributions
Patches are available for most Linux distributions. You need to verify your
version and update in case is necessary:
http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/linux-patch-cve-2015-7547-glibc-getaddrinfo-stack-based-buffer-overflow/
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix
Does anyone have any knowledge of postfix being exploited via
CVE-2015-7547, glibc stack-based buffer overflow in getaddrinfo()? Any
concerns about the exploitability?
Discussion here about how fast we must patch glibc.
--
Robert Lopez
Unix Systems Administrator
Central New Mexico Community Coll
Good day,
What is the best way to accomplish the following:
We want to block emails bound for the Internet, we have domain based rules
already setup in the transport file for our internal domains.
But would like email bound for any domains other than those, to go either
/dev/null or to a local p
Hi Wietse,
No, I don't mean the local files. Local files are effective for local
admins, not for the world nor a community.
The mechanisms I have in mind are similar to:
reject_rhsbl_reverse_client
reject_rhsbl_sender
reject_rbl_client
but for the corresponded Name servers (names and IPs).
RBLs
On 23/02/16 08:57, Curtis Maurand wrote:
> The problem was in the /etc/nsswitch.conf.
>
> I changed the line
>
> hosts: files dns
>
> to
>
> hosts:dns files
>
> and that solved the trouble.
You likely want this to be, "files dns", otherwise with dns listed first
you will find t
Marius Gologan:
> Would be useful to have a native blacklist check for the Name servers (names
> and IPs) of the sender domain and unverified client domain name.
Did you mean:
check_client_ns_access
check_reverse_client_ns_access
check_helo_ns_access
check_sender_ns_access
check_recipient_ns_acce
Hi,
Would be useful to have a native blacklist check for the Name servers (names
and IPs) of the sender domain and unverified client domain name.
I've been using scripts to achieve this and and the results are effective in
the following cases:
- when the spammer rotates the IPs, Domain names
Sorry about that reply to the list. I wasn't aware that the
registrar had listed postfix-users as the primary recipient.
Wietse
Evin Lee:
> Dear sir or madam,
> We are an agency engaging in registering brand name and domain names. Today,
> Our center received an application from Nxoeo Holdings ltd and they apply to
> register postfix as their brand name and some top-level domain names(.CN .HK
> etc). We found the main bo
Greetings,
I'd like to announce the release of savacli. It is a command-line client for
AVIRAs OEM Antivirus engine SAVAPI. You may download sources and documentation
at https://github.com/sys4/savacli.
The client 'savacli' was built in a project for a German company that wants to
remain anonymou
21 matches
Mail list logo
