Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 03:45:42PM -0500, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> > The postmap command reads input from stdin one line at a time, and
> > applies each input line to all the header_checks patterns. It can't
> > be used for multiline input
On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 11:11:40PM +0100, Joachim Lindenberg via Postfix-users
wrote:
> But is there any reason that prevents google to use DNSSEC other than
> the arrogance of power?
My read is that there is not sufficient market pressure to make it a
priority. Robust implementation at scale i
But is there any reason that prevents google to use DNSSEC other than the
arrogance of power? Imho it is obvious that mta-sts is only useful for big
players that prefer to ignore destinations not in their cache. For the rest of
us, mta-sts is inferior to smtp-dane.
Joachim
-Ursprüngliche Na
On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 10:01:29PM +0100, Joachim Lindenberg via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Imho you get pretty close to mta-sts if you use verify together with a
> DNSSEC-validating resolver. You just validate the "authorized" MTAs by
> different means.
Yes, but google.com and yahoo.com (the domain
Imho you get pretty close to mta-sts if you use verify together with a
DNSSEC-validating resolver. You just validate the "authorized" MTAs by
different means.
I still think SMTP-DANE (RFC 7672) is preferrable.
Regards,
Joachim
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Michael W. Lucas via Postfix-u
On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 03:45:42PM -0500, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
> The postmap command reads input from stdin one line at a time, and
> applies each input line to all the header_checks patterns. It can't
> be used for multiline inputs.
Time has passed, and you've forgotten that y
Mailinglists35 via Postfix-users:
>
> Hi
>
> I run a postfix 3.5.9 smtp relay for a webserver that sends user signup and
> forgot password emails. That's the only use case and the server does not
> receive any other emails and neither generates any locally.
>
> I'm trying to prevent le
On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 03:05:43PM -0500, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 01:28:00PM -0500, Michael W. Lucas via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> > Realistically, Gmail and Yahoo do not care about my MTA-STS
> > reports. All they care about is that I validate their X
On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 09:23:19PM +0200, Mailinglists35 via Postfix-users
wrote:
> The postmap input looks like this:
>
> echo -e"Received: from [127.0.0.1] (web1dev [10.11.12.13])\n\tby
> email.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9056
>7E002\n\tfor ; Fri,8 Mar 2024 19:20:29 +02
On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 01:28:00PM -0500, Michael W. Lucas via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Realistically, Gmail and Yahoo do not care about my MTA-STS
> reports. All they care about is that I validate their X.509 certs.
>
> Is there any reason to use something like mta-sts-daemon in that
> transport
Solved. I had from previous tries set `regexp` instead of pcre in main.cf
header checks
After changing to `pcre` it does what I intended to do.
>
> On Mar 8, 2024 at 9:23, mailto:mailinglist...@gmail.com)>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> I run a postfix 3.5.9 smtp re
Hi
I run a postfix 3.5.9 smtp relay for a webserver that sends user signup and
forgot password emails. That's the only use case and the server does not
receive any other emails and neither generates any locally.
I'm trying to prevent leaking internal information (hostname & IP) in
R
Hi,
Pondering MTA-STS validation.
My understanding is the recommendation is to use DANE as the default
(smtp_tls_security_level=dane), but if you want MTA-STS for select
domains you can point them at a transport that requires X.509
validation.
Realistically, Gmail and Yahoo do not care about my
Stephen Satchell via Postfix-users:
> Assuming that one's configuration has open relay, what does a log entry
> for relayed mail look like?
>
> I don't think I've any open relay, but I want to look and make sure.
>
> I've searched for half an hour, and no answer came up. But, I did find
> some
Stephen Satchell via Postfix-users skrev den 2024-03-08 06:52:
grep relay= mail.log | grep -v relay=local
I can then use the message ID to get all the log information for each
questioned transaction.
Am I on the right road? Please disabuse me of any incorrect notions.
is it not grep -i r
On 07.03.24 21:52, Stephen Satchell via Postfix-users wrote:
Assuming that one's configuration has open relay, what does a log
entry for relayed mail look like?
It looks like any other mail, just it was received without authentication,
from unstrusted clients and sent to remote (not in relay_d
You can also configure a non-zero smtpd_client_message_rate_limit
On 07.03.24 17:21, Colin McKinnon via Postfix-users wrote:
H, not so sure about that. The docs do advise against this for
legitimate traffic - and I've yet to see anything in the documentation that
describes what happens when
17 matches
Mail list logo
