On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 08:17:40PM +0200, Sebastian Nielsen wrote:
> Sean Greenslade:
> Thats the responsibility of the server who is authorized to act on behalf of
> that domain.
Yes, however I am trying to make this discussion relevant to the OP's
question. Authenticating based solely on origina
> On 05 Sep 2016, at 13:48, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>> Why *sender* access? That is surely a recipient address.
> So make a new recipient_access file and add check_recipient_access to
> smtp_recipient_restrictions?
Thank you, yes, that sorted it.
On 05 Sep 2016, at 13:48, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
> Why *sender* access? That is surely a recipient address.
I don’t have a recipient_access file. I do have sender_access.prce in
stmpd_recipient_restrictions though.
> Secondly, why use regular expressions, when indexed files will do:
>
>
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 01:42:59PM -0600, @lbutlr wrote:
> I have a user that uses address extensions quite a lot. one
> extension she uses has become nothing but spam since her
> (cancelled) credit card shared the address with advertisers.
>
> She would like to have mail to user+vis...@domain.t
On 05 Sep 2016, at 13:42, @lbutlr wrote:
> My initial idea was in sender_access.pcre add a line:
Oh.
# postconf -f smtpd_recipient_restrictions
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject_unauth_destination,
reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
reject_unknown_
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 01:42:59PM -0600, @lbutlr wrote:
> I have a user that uses address extensions quite a lot. one extension she
> uses has become nothing but spam since her (cancelled) credit card shared
> the address with advertisers.
>
> She would like to have mail to user+vis...@domain.tl
I have a user that uses address extensions quite a lot. one extension she uses
has become nothing but spam since her (cancelled) credit card shared the
address with advertisers.
She would like to have mail to user+vis...@domain.tld rejected while not
affecting an mail to u...@domain.tld or user
"Thus, the receiving postfix server, could be configured to add a pass/fail
header of SPF and DKIM authentication."
This came up a few months ago on the list, with the idea of doing a rewrite on
the subject line. For example, SpamAssassin writes "spam". The new rewrite
would indicate SPF and DK
LazyGranch:
I look it at the point of view of the server who are receiving the mail.
So basically, the OP has some email adress like "webapprecei...@example.org"
that receives mail and processes this automatically into a database.
Only authorized users are allowed to send to this specifically craf
Seems to me we are in total agreement except for sender versus receiver
terminology . That depends on your point of view. But I don't know if you can
enforce SPF and DKIM on a domain name basis. If you can't, I assure you much
mail will be rejected. Incoming mail using remailing services will f
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 07:23:10PM +0200, Sebastian Nielsen wrote:
> No, you're wrong. What the OP should do, is to enforce SPF/DKIM on
> specific RECEIVERS. For example, enforcing SPF/DKIM on for example
> webappad...@example.org.
It's important to remember what each step is actually authenticati
No, you're wrong. What the OP should do, is to enforce SPF/DKIM on specific
RECEIVERS. For example, enforcing SPF/DKIM on for example
webappad...@example.org.
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
För li...@lazygranch.co
First of all, be wary taking advice from a newbie like me. That said, if you
enforce SPF and DKIM in postfix, you will be rejecting a lot of mail. If there
is a way to enforce SPF and DKIM on specific senders, that would be another
story.
But look at this line from the original message :
"Wha
There is possibility to use SPF or DKIM to ensure the sender is not spoofed.
For this particular service, you can run your SPF and/or DKIM validator in
mandatory mode, eg, a missing SPF record will be treated as -all, and a
missing DKIM signature is treated as a invalid one.
Then you can actually
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 03:25:40AM -0700, rei wrote:
> I keep getting these errors when trying to send email using TLS connection:
Is the system that's logging the below sending or receiving email?
> SSL3 alert read:fatal:unknown CA SSL_accept:failed in SSLv3 read client
> certificate A
> SSL_a
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 07:52:02PM +0800, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
> I have a postfix/dovecot installation on the same server as my company's
> webapp. This webapp involves a lot of regular data entry, which is a
> real pain to do using HTML forms. What I would really like to do is be
> able to send
The certificat authority that issued your client's certificate is unknown to
postfix.
- Add the CA to /var/spool/postfix/etc/ssl/certs/ - Add to the global
/var/spool/postfix/etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt file
Add these two lines to your main.cf
smtp_tls_CApath = /etc/ssl/certs/smtp_tls
I have a postfix/dovecot installation on the same server as my company's
webapp. This webapp involves a lot of regular data entry, which is a
real pain to do using HTML forms. What I would really like to do is be
able to send structured emails to the server, and have postfix pass them
through a tra
I keep getting these errors when trying to send email using TLS connection:
SSL3 alert read:fatal:unknown CA
SSL_accept:failed in SSLv3 read client certificate A
SSL_accept error from xxx.com[159.203.103.107]: 0
warning: TLS library problem: 6605:error:14094418:SSL
routines:SSL3_READ_BYTES:tlsv1 al
19 matches
Mail list logo
