Am 15.11.2016 um 21:57 schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter:
Good morning Patrick & List members,
please find attached a modified version of the scripts that sets the CAT var
to either gz (as on my opensuse 42.1) or bz2. Feel free to use it according
to the
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
> > I've got some clients that are really simple and don't understand
> > various
> > message encoding types, such as quoted-printable, base64, possibly
> > others.
> > They understand plain text only. So, for users in specific domains,
> > I'd
> > like to convert quoted-printable, base64 and poss
On 15 Nov 2016, at 23:35, Michael Fox wrote:
I've got some clients that are really simple and don't understand
various
message encoding types, such as quoted-printable, base64, possibly
others.
They understand plain text only. So, for users in specific domains,
I'd
like to convert quoted-prin
On 15 Nov 2016, at 23:05, Peter wrote:
On 16/11/16 12:20, Bill Cole wrote:
No, there's not.
Yes there is.
Read what I was responding to more carefully. Rich was seeking to avoid
manually entering single addresses and CIDR blocks.
However, I happened to have an old Perl script
This i
I've got some clients that are really simple and don't understand various
message encoding types, such as quoted-printable, base64, possibly others.
They understand plain text only. So, for users in specific domains, I'd
like to convert quoted-printable, base64 and possibly other encoded messages
On 16/11/16 12:20, Bill Cole wrote:
> No, there's not.
Yes there is.
> However, I happened to have an old Perl script
This is completely insane! Postfix fully supports CIDR notation in the
CIDR table type, this works for access lists or any other settings that
reference tables:
http://www.pos
On 16/11/16 07:07, Gomes, Rich wrote:
> Just a quick question since I have not found a way in my Googling.
>
> We are replacing some of our internal Exchange relays with postfix.
> Currently we have other internal postfix relays which utilize a client access
> file to allow relaying.
> The file
On 15/11/2016 9:52 PM, Sean Greenslade wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 04:21:17AM -0500, Ron Wheeler wrote:
Fail2ban might be able to do the whack-a-mole in a sensible manner that
allowed for innocent interruptions but banned the bad guys
For the kind of attempts I typically see, F2B won't do mu
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:22 PM, Sebastian Nielsen
wrote:
> You need to be more clear here.
>
> When you say Gmail account on port 587 I don’t entirely understand what
> you are doing. Are you using Gmail as upstream smarthost?
>
1. Open Gmail
2. Press gear icon and select "Settings"
3. Select "
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:23 PM, wrote:
> Have you tried to add the certs to the root store on your phone? I'm not
> on an iPhone, but that is what I did for Let's Encrypt. And it doesn't seem
> to always work.
>
I can do that, but I don't want to make all the other users on this mail
server (a
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
> > On Nov 14, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Steve Jenkins
> wrote:
> >
> > # postconf -n | grep tls
> > smtp_tls_CAfile = $smtpd_tls_CAfile
> > smtp_tls_loglevel = 1
> > smtp_tls_security_level = may
>
> The above, being outgoing (SMTP client) setti
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 04:21:17AM -0500, Ron Wheeler wrote:
> Fail2ban might be able to do the whack-a-mole in a sensible manner that
> allowed for innocent interruptions but banned the bad guys
For the kind of attempts I typically see, F2B won't do much. It's
usually not a brute force type of at
Aban Dokht:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm searching for a hint, how to move deferred mails to another SMTP
> server after an adjustable time, e.g. after 4 hours.
>
> I've already found the fallback_relay setting, but this will move
> deferred mails immediately after the first failed delivery attempt.
If y
btb:
[ Charset windows-1252 converted... ]
> On 2016.11.15 11.44, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > btb:
> >> since parameters can be user defined, i think it would be good if
> >> the documentation stated this, maybe in postconf(5)? it would
> >> alleviate guessing games.
> >>
> >> possibly something lik
Awesome!
Thank you, I will give this a shot.
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Bill Cole
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 6:20 PM
To: Postfix users
Subject: Re: Using consecutive IPs in a client access file
On
On 15 Nov 2016, at 13:07, Gomes, Rich wrote:
Just a quick question since I have not found a way in my Googling.
We are replacing some of our internal Exchange relays with postfix.
Currently we have other internal postfix relays which utilize a client
access file to allow relaying.
The file c
Hi all,
I'm searching for a hint, how to move deferred mails to another SMTP
server after an adjustable time, e.g. after 4 hours.
I've already found the fallback_relay setting, but this will move
deferred mails immediately after the first failed delivery attempt.
Any idea, how to move defer
On 15 Nov 2016, at 13:46, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
Eric Abrahamsen writes:
I'm trying to successfully receive emails from my state's health care
service, which is apparently broken in the way it sends emails. These
are the errors:
ericabrahamsen.net/smtpd[24193]: warning: hostname\
mail-r
vim comes with syntax highlighting for Postfix, but the syntax file is
outdated and doesn't cover LDAP and other drivers.
For those who like an up to date syntax highlighting that reflects your
Postfix installation take a look at https://github.com/sys4/vim-postfix.
Christian (Rößner) took the ti
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 14:09:03 +0100, Volker Cordes
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just stopped our server from sending out spam mails. A password from
> one of our customers was hacked or somehow leaked so that the mails were
> sent by an authenticated user. Now I was wondering if it is possible to
> bloc
On 15.11.2016 14:09, Volker Cordes wrote:
> I was wondering if it is possible to [...] implement blocking using
> geoip-services (99% of our customers are based in germany).
Will any of the users be travelling and/or utilizing anonymity networks
like Tor (see https://www.torproject.org/)? Tor exi
> The exchange servers have some groups of consecutive IPs on their allow list,
> some cover 5 or 6 IPs, others 100.
> Is there a way to provide the same list .i.e.
> 192.168.0.2-12OK
>
> without:
>
> Listing them all individually
> i.e.
> 192.168.0.2 OK
> 192.168.0.3 OK
> Etc...
>
Eric Abrahamsen writes:
> I'm trying to successfully receive emails from my state's health care
> service, which is apparently broken in the way it sends emails. These
> are the errors:
>
> ericabrahamsen.net/smtpd[24193]: warning: hostname\
> mail-relay.secure-24.net does not resolve to add
On 11/15/16 13:43, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
> I'm trying to successfully receive emails from my state's health care
> service, which is apparently broken in the way it sends emails. These
> are the errors:
>
> ericabrahamsen.net/smtpd[24193]: warning: hostname\
> mail-relay.secure-24.net does n
I'm trying to successfully receive emails from my state's health care
service, which is apparently broken in the way it sends emails. These
are the errors:
ericabrahamsen.net/smtpd[24193]: warning: hostname\
mail-relay.secure-24.net does not resolve to address 199.71.239.178
ericabrahamsen.n
On 15/11/2016 21:09, Volker Cordes wrote:
I just stopped our server from sending out spam mails. A password from
one of our customers was hacked or somehow leaked so that the mails were
sent by an authenticated user. Now I was wondering if it is possible to
block users that authenticate themselv
Just a quick question since I have not found a way in my Googling.
We are replacing some of our internal Exchange relays with postfix.
Currently we have other internal postfix relays which utilize a client access
file to allow relaying.
The file contains all single IPs, no ranges.
The exchange
On 2016.11.15 11.44, Wietse Venema wrote:
> btb:
>> since parameters can be user defined, i think it would be good if
>> the documentation stated this, maybe in postconf(5)? it would
>> alleviate guessing games.
>>
>> possibly something like:
>>
>> Postfix main.cf file format [...] ? A logical l
On 2016.11.15 11.32, Wietse Venema wrote:
> btb:
>> in the postconf(5) documentation, the format section says:
>>
>> The expressions "${name:value}" and "${name?{value}}" are replaced
>> with "value" when "$name" is empty. These forms are supported with
>> Postfix versions ? 2.2 and ? 3.0, respect
btb:
> since parameters can be user defined, i think it would be good if the
> documentation stated this, maybe in postconf(5)? it would alleviate
> guessing games.
>
> possibly something like:
>
> Postfix main.cf file format
> [...]
> ? A logical line starts with non-whitespace text. A line tha
btb:
> in the postconf(5) documentation, the format section says:
>
> The expressions "${name:value}" and "${name?{value}}" are replaced with
> "value" when "$name" is empty. These forms are supported with Postfix
> versions ? 2.2 and ? 3.0, respectively.
>
> should the ? in "${name?{value}}" be
max:
> Let me try to describe what we try to achieve.
>
> We want to intercept e-mail from the different servers (preferably in
> separated mail boxes), do some content inspection and send them out again at
> a later time.
>
> We'd use java mail to do the content inspection, strip CC en BCC en us
I would say that GeoIP would be the best.
And those users that need to travel need to pre-request travelling access
through a captcha-protected AND geoip restricted web interface prior to
travelling. (but once opened, they can extend access out-of-country)
And then they need to specify time spen
in the postconf(5) documentation, the format section says:
The expressions "${name:value}" and "${name?{value}}" are replaced with
"value" when "$name" is empty. These forms are supported with Postfix
versions ≥ 2.2 and ≥ 3.0, respectively.
should the ? in "${name?{value}}" be a :?
-ben
On 2016-11-15 08:09 AM, Volker Cordes wrote:
Hello,
I just stopped our server from sending out spam mails. A password from
one of our customers was hacked or somehow leaked so that the mails were
sent by an authenticated user. Now I was wondering if it is possible to
block users that authenticat
Am 15.11.2016 um 14:09 schrieb Volker Cordes:
Good afternoon Volker,
dear List.
We had a similar incident last year. What I then did was to parse the
logfiles on a daily basis to check where the logins occur from. We have a
customer base from Germany mainly (except business travelling people), so
On 2016.11.14 20.04, Wietse Venema wrote:
> btb:
>> by chance, i happened to create a parameter which used a dash in the
>> name, and was referencing it in another parameter, e.g.:
>>
>> foo-param = foo
>> bar_param = ${foo-param}
>>
>> upon restart, postfix complained about this:
>>
>> postconf: w
Hello,
I just stopped our server from sending out spam mails. A password from
one of our customers was hacked or somehow leaked so that the mails were
sent by an authenticated user. Now I was wondering if it is possible to
block users that authenticate themselves from a lot of different IP
address
Helo all,
What I am trying to do is whitelist cidr ranges stored in a mysql database and
fallback to smtp auth for the previous unmatched ip addresses. This is the
pseudocode:
if (client_ip in whitelist_mysql_cidr_ranges){ accept
} else if (sender is smtp_authenticated ) { accept} else {
Let me try to describe what we try to achieve.
We want to intercept e-mail from the different servers (preferably in
separated mail boxes), do some content inspection and send them out again at
a later time.
We'd use java mail to do the content inspection, strip CC en BCC en use
X-Original-To hea
> On Nov 15, 2016, at 5:07 AM, max wrote:
>
> We setup a postfix mailserver (192.168.0.1) as a relay for our internal
> network. All e-mail (disregarded the final destination) should be stored on
> this machine for a period of time before we re-inject the email into postfix
> and relay it to our
Hi,
We setup a postfix mailserver (192.168.0.1) as a relay for our internal
network. All e-mail (disregarded the final destination) should be stored on
this machine for a period of time before we re-inject the email into postfix
and relay it to our outgoing mailserver (192.168.0.2) who'll deliver
Fail2ban might be able to do the whack-a-mole in a sensible manner that
allowed for innocent interruptions but banned the bad guys
Ron
On 14/11/2016 11:39 PM, Sean Greenslade wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 08:21:24PM -0800, vod vos wrote:
so are there any configurations to auto ban this kind o
43 matches
Mail list logo
