* Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users :
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 07:42:56AM +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter via
> Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > - The key material is 4096 Bit and it was brought to my attention there's a
> > bug / missing functionality (?) in opendmarc which results in the program
> >
On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 07:42:56AM +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users
wrote:
> - The key material is 4096 Bit and it was brought to my attention there's a
> bug / missing functionality (?) in opendmarc which results in the program
> being unable to handle keys at sizes larger than 2
Am 07.03.23 um 20:32 schrieb Charles Sprickman:
On Mar 7, 2023, at 1:14 PM, Robert Schetterer via Postfix-users
wrote:
Am 07.03.23 um 18:57 schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users:
* toganm--- via Postfix-users :
Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is
* Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users :
> * Scott Kitterman via Postfix-users :
>
> ...
>
> > For Debian, if someone can find/test patches, I can get them into Debian's
> > package. I assume other distributors are similar. Feel free to update the
> > Debian bug with information. It's unfor
* Scott Kitterman via Postfix-users :
...
> For Debian, if someone can find/test patches, I can get them into Debian's
> package. I assume other distributors are similar. Feel free to update the
> Debian bug with information. It's unfortunate we don't have a better
> maintained solution.
I
* postfix--- via Postfix-users :
> > > > OpenDMARC is segfaulting. That's what 'signal 11' means. Postfix fails
> > > > to get an answer to its end-of-body milter call because of the segfault
> > > > closing the other end of that socket. That failure results in Postfix
> > > > sending a 4xx to t
On March 7, 2023 11:37:53 PM UTC, Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users
wrote:
>On 3/7/23 15:28, John Stoffel via Postfix-users wrote:
>>> "mailmary---" == mailmary--- via Postfix-users
>>> writes:
>>
>>> Unfortunately I've seen this crash as well, its actually quite
>>> frequent in my
On 3/7/23 15:28, John Stoffel via Postfix-users wrote:
"mailmary---" == mailmary--- via Postfix-users
writes:
Unfortunately I've seen this crash as well, its actually quite
frequent in my case and I'm using a newer version of OpenDMARC than
you:
# opendmarc -V
opendmarc: OpenDMARC Filter
No solution so far, I think there are 2-3 open bug reports on
github, but since the project is very dead, nobody has bothered to
fix the problem.
So what's the option for a more upto date version of DKIM milter for debian?
And what would be a dmarc replacement or solution for RHEL systems?
__
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
<20230307214046.ajvsx%stef...@sdaoden.eu>:
|The nice thing about this new list server is that it plays very
The ugly that it uses this terrible "Who via LIST "
stuff even if the sender does not (granted: yet) uses DKIM.
--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer,The m
The nice thing about this new list server is that it plays very
well with gray listing (without causing the immediate "retry
storms" that sometimes can be seen, especially with German service
providers which do nothing but themselve perform address
verification, and are unfortunately used very ofte
OpenDMARC is segfaulting. That's what 'signal 11' means. Postfix fails to get
an answer to its end-of-body milter call because of the segfault closing the
other end of that socket. That failure results in Postfix sending a 4xx to the
client.
First step is to verify your installation of OpenDMAR
OpenDMARC is segfaulting. That's what 'signal 11' means.
On Mar 7, 2023, at 11:37 AM, postfix--- via Postfix-users
As far as i know everything is up to date.
[root]# opendmarc -V
opendmarc: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1
SMFI_VERSION 0x101
libmilter version 1.0.1
Active cod
On Tue, 7 Mar 2023, John Stoffel via Postfix-users wrote:
So what's the option for a more upto date version of DKIM milter for debian?
rspamd does DKIM, SPF, DMARC and ARC (and lots more), and doesn't segfault (so
far ;-)
Good luck.
___
Postfix-us
No solution so far, I think there are 2-3 open bug reports on
github, but since the project is very dead, nobody has bothered to
fix the problem.
So what's the option for a more upto date version of DKIM milter for debian?
fwiw, for inbound DKIM, DMARC, ARC, etc, this
https://github.com/fas
> "mailmary---" == mailmary--- via Postfix-users
> writes:
> Unfortunately I've seen this crash as well, its actually quite
> frequent in my case and I'm using a newer version of OpenDMARC than
> you:
> # opendmarc -V
> opendmarc: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2
> SMFI_VERSION 0x101
>
That works, but I have the list in contacts for a reason! So I can
remember the address when I need to post.
On 3/7/2023 1:26 PM, Matthew McGehrin via Postfix-users wrote:
Hello.
I found the issue. It seems I had the list address saved as a contact,
so Thunderbird was displaying Postfix User
Unfortunately I've seen this crash as well, its actually quite frequent in my
case and I'm using a newer version of OpenDMARC than you:
# opendmarc -V
opendmarc: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2
SMFI_VERSION 0x101
libmilter version 1.0.1
Active code options:
W
Am 07.03.23 um 20:37 schrieb postfix--- via Postfix-users:
OpenDMARC is segfaulting. That's what 'signal 11' means. Postfix fails to get
an answer to its end-of-body milter call because of the segfault closing the
other end of that socket. That failure results in Postfix sending a 4xx to the
> On Mar 7, 2023, at 11:37 AM, postfix--- via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
>> OpenDMARC is segfaulting. That's what 'signal 11' means. Postfix fails to
>> get an answer to its end-of-body milter call because of the segfault closing
>> the other end of that socket. That failure results in Postfix s
OpenDMARC is segfaulting. That's what 'signal 11' means. Postfix fails to get
an answer to its end-of-body milter call because of the segfault closing the
other end of that socket. That failure results in Postfix sending a 4xx to the
client.
First step is to verify your installation of OpenDMA
Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users wrote:
> * Michael Grimm via Postfix-users :
>> toganm--- via Postfix-users wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is listed
>>> in any rbl sites.
>>
>> If you really were in mailing business for some time you woul
> On Mar 7, 2023, at 1:14 PM, Robert Schetterer via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> Am 07.03.23 um 18:57 schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users:
>> * toganm--- via Postfix-users :
>>> Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is listed
>>> in any rbl sites. For one i
* Michael Grimm via Postfix-users :
> toganm--- via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is listed
> > in any rbl sites.
>
> If you really were in mailing business for some time you would know how RBLs
> work: They react, they do not read
On 2023-03-07 at 13:27:41 UTC-0500 (Tue, 07 Mar 2023 13:27:41 -0500)
postfix--- via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
Reviewing logs I notice many soft bounces from the new list. Some
emails from the new list have been accepted and I don't understand
what the differences are. I have not s
On 08/03/2023 01.09, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Phil Stracchino :
On 3/6/23 11:08, Wietse Venema wrote:
This week, the Postfix mailing lists will be migrated from Majordomo at
Cloud9.net to Mailman at Sys4.de. Thanks to Cloud9.net for hosting the
Postfix lists for 24 years, and thanks to Sys4
toganm--- via Postfix-users wrote:
> Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is listed
> in any rbl sites.
If you really were in mailing business for some time you would know how RBLs
work: They react, they do not read crystal balls!
Regards,
Michael
___
* toganm--- via Postfix-users :
>
> Hi,
>
> Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is listed
> in any rbl sites. For one it is listed in Abusix and my server is rejected it
> as a result
>
> Abusix Mail Intelligence; https://lookup.abusix.com/search?q=188.68.34.52
l
On 3/7/2023 12:27 PM, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote:
Reviewing logs I notice many soft bounces from the new list. Some
emails from the new list have been accepted and I don't understand
what the differences are. I have not seen these types of errors
before and don't understand what is caus
Reviewing logs I notice many soft bounces from the new list. Some emails from
the new list have been accepted and I don't understand what the differences
are. I have not seen these types of errors before and don't understand what is
causing them. Here are just two examples:
Mar 7 13:05:25 ho
Hello.
I found the issue. It seems I had the list address saved as a contact,
so Thunderbird was displaying Postfix Users. I removed the contact and
it's displaying the poster name.
See screenshot.
Thank you.
MatthewM
___
Postfix-users mailing lis
Am 07.03.23 um 18:57 schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users:
* toganm--- via Postfix-users :
Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is listed
in any rbl sites. For one it is listed in Abusix and my server is rejected it
as a result
What makes you believe the
Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-03-07 18:57:
* toganm--- via Postfix-users :
Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is
listed
in any rbl sites. For one it is listed in Abusix and my server is
rejected it as a result
What makes you believe the I
What date does this take effect and we start receiving list mail from the new
server host?
7th March 2023 (today), 12:35 UTC (approx 5 hours ago).
Oh, silly me. I thought they said a footer would be added when it happened.
Guess I read that wrong.
Looks like no issues and i didn't have to d
Le 07/03/2023 à 18:42, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users a écrit :
Matthew McGehrin via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-03-07 18:31:
Any workarounds in Thunderbird to override this behavior?
imho if you show Reply-To in this list you will see original poster ?
i have not tryed it self yet, using
On 3/7/2023 11:31 AM, Matthew McGehrin via Postfix-users wrote:
Hello.
Sadly, when viewing this list in Thunderbird, it only displays
"Postfix Users" as the From address, versus showing the posters
name. I tend to ignore posters I don't recognize, and now i need to
open each post to see who r
* toganm--- via Postfix-users :
> Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is listed
> in any rbl sites. For one it is listed in Abusix and my server is rejected it
> as a result
What makes you believe the IP had been blocklisted before?
The IP was blocklisted today. It
toganm--- via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-03-07 18:32:
Abusix Mail Intelligence;
https://lookup.abusix.com/search?q=188.68.34.52
https://multirbl.valli.org/lookup/188.68.34.52.html
not even on dnswl.org :/
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-
Matthew McGehrin via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-03-07 18:31:
Any workarounds in Thunderbird to override this behavior?
imho if you show Reply-To in this list you will see original poster ?
i have not tryed it self yet, using roundcube mostly
___
P
Hi,
Maybe it would have been a better idea to check if the mail server is listed
in any rbl sites. For one it is listed in Abusix and my server is rejected it
as a result
Abusix Mail Intelligence; https://lookup.abusix.com/search?q=188.68.34.52
___
P
Hello.
Sadly, when viewing this list in Thunderbird, it only displays "Postfix
Users" as the From address, versus showing the posters name. I tend to
ignore posters I don't recognize, and now i need to open each post to
see who replied.
Any workarounds in Thunderbird to override this behavi
Hi,
On 7 Mar 2023, at 18:21, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote:
> What date does this take effect and we start receiving list mail from the new
> server host?
7th March 2023 (today), 12:35 UTC (approx 5 hours ago).
Greetings
Carsten
___
Postfix-use
What date does this take effect and we start receiving list mail from the new
server host?
So we can keep an eye out to make sure no issues on our side, whitelisting if
needed.
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe
* Harald Koch via Postfix-users :
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023, at 12:02, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users wrote:
> >
> > why is arc invalid ?
>
> My email provider is adding a little more detail:
>
> Authentication-Results: pb-mx20.pobox.com;
> arc=invalid
> (as.1.list.sys4.de=invalid (public
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023, at 12:02, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> why is arc invalid ?
My email provider is adding a little more detail:
Authentication-Results: pb-mx20.pobox.com;
arc=invalid
(as.1.list.sys4.de=invalid (public key: does not support hash algorithm
'sha256'), am
I've found one change to the mailing list header I didn't expect, and my mail
filter for the list 'broke' on it.
The old server had:
List-Id: Postfix users
The new one has:
List-Id: "For discussions about using Postfix: questions, problem reports,
or feature requests. Open subscription, unmoderat
Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-03-07 17:16:
I'll let Jörg at sys4 take a look at this.
+1
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0
tests=ARC_INVALID,ARC_SIGNED,AWL,
DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,DMARC_MISSING,
KAM_SHORT,MAILING_LI
Gerald Galster via Postfix-users:
> The tab "Archiving" under "List Settings" offers "Archive policy":
> "Public archives", "Private archives", "Do not archive this list".
These settings are mutually exclusive, i.e. the setting "Private
archives" turns OFF "Do not archive this list".
The correct
Out of sheer curiosity ... Mailman 2 or 3?
>>>
>>> Mailman 3 with ARC support enabled. Additionally all listmail will be DKIM
>>> signed.
>>
>> Do you plan to enable a public archive at
>> https://list.sys4.de/hyperkitty/list/postfix-us...@de.postfix.org/
>> as an alternative to marc.info,
FYI
header rewriting and DKIM signing works correctly, ARC does not.
Say both spamassassin and openarc-milter
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.5 tests=ARC_INVALID,ARC_SIGNED,
A_DKIM_VERIFIED,A_SPF_PASS,BAYES_00,DCC_CHECK,DCC_REPUT_70_89,
DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_
* Wietse Venema via Postfix-users :
> Gerald Galster via Postfix-users:
> >
> > >> Out of sheer curiosity ... Mailman 2 or 3?
> > >
> > > Mailman 3 with ARC support enabled. Additionally all listmail will be DKIM
> > > signed.
> >
> > Do you plan to enable a public archive at
> > https://list.
Gerald Galster via Postfix-users:
>
> >> Out of sheer curiosity ... Mailman 2 or 3?
> >
> > Mailman 3 with ARC support enabled. Additionally all listmail will be DKIM
> > signed.
>
> Do you plan to enable a public archive at
> https://list.sys4.de/hyperkitty/list/postfix-us...@de.postfix.org/
>> Out of sheer curiosity ... Mailman 2 or 3?
>
> Mailman 3 with ARC support enabled. Additionally all listmail will be DKIM
> signed.
Do you plan to enable a public archive at
https://list.sys4.de/hyperkitty/list/postfix-us...@de.postfix.org/
as an alternative to marc.info, mail-archive.com,
The Postfix mailing list migration should be complete by now, except
for some old messages that may still be queued on some mail servers.
I'll manually handle any sub/unsubscribe requests that may still
arrive at the old address.
See below for the pre-migration announcement, with a summary
of the
* Matus UHLAR - fantomas :
> > > On 3/6/23 11:08, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > > This week, the Postfix mailing lists will be migrated from Majordomo at
> > > > Cloud9.net to Mailman at Sys4.de. Thanks to Cloud9.net for hosting the
> > > > Postfix lists for 24 years, and thanks to Sys4 for being the
Peter Wienemann:
> Dear Wietse,
>
> On 24.02.23 22:57, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > You need to configure the Postfix LMTP client that it is doing final
> > delivery (LMTP does not assume that every delivery is final, they
> > could be to a content filter instead).
> >
> > Either in master.cf:
> >
>
Dear Wietse,
On 24.02.23 22:57, Wietse Venema wrote:
You need to configure the Postfix LMTP client that it is doing final
delivery (LMTP does not assume that every delivery is final, they
could be to a content filter instead).
Either in master.cf:
lmtp unix .. .. .. .. .. lmtpd flags=DORX
On 3/6/23 11:08, Wietse Venema wrote:
> This week, the Postfix mailing lists will be migrated from Majordomo at
> Cloud9.net to Mailman at Sys4.de. Thanks to Cloud9.net for hosting the
> Postfix lists for 24 years, and thanks to Sys4 for being the new host.
>
> This is the pre-migration announceme
* Phil Stracchino :
> On 3/6/23 11:08, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > This week, the Postfix mailing lists will be migrated from Majordomo at
> > Cloud9.net to Mailman at Sys4.de. Thanks to Cloud9.net for hosting the
> > Postfix lists for 24 years, and thanks to Sys4 for being the new host.
> >
> > This
59 matches
Mail list logo
