[pfx] Re: Is there a way to just quickly deliver "everything" to a file somewhere

2024-04-10 Thread Dan Mahoney via Postfix-users
> On Apr 2, 2024, at 10:52, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users > wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 04:14:29AM -0400, Dan Mahoney via Postfix-users wrote: >> Hey there all, >> >> I’m setting up a staging version of dayjob’s ticket system, and we’d >> basically like postfix to still function,

[pfx] Re: reliable RBL

2024-04-10 Thread DL Neil via Postfix-users
On 10/04/24 22:50, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users wrote: On 10.04.24 17:46, Mr. Peng via Postfix-users wrote: I have been using spamhaus, spamcop, sorbs as the RBL providers for antispam. But some of the customers speak to me about the FP issues caused by RBL. Do you think the three RB

[pfx] Re: reliable RBL

2024-04-10 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users
Dnia 10.04.2024 o godz. 10:22:52 Bill Cole via Postfix-users pisze: > I have been using spamhaus, spamcop, sorbs as the RBL providers for > antispam. > But some of the customers speak to me about the FP issues caused by RBL. > Do you think the three RBL above are reliable in a practical system?

[pfx] Re: reliable RBL

2024-04-10 Thread Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users
Dnia 10.04.2024 o godz. 10:22:52 Bill Cole via Postfix-users pisze: > > I have been using spamhaus, spamcop, sorbs as the RBL providers for > > antispam. > > But some of the customers speak to me about the FP issues caused by RBL. > > Do you think the three RBL above are reliable in a practical sys

[pfx] Re: reliable RBL

2024-04-10 Thread Bill Cole via Postfix-users
On 2024-04-10 at 05:46:36 UTC-0400 (Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:46:36 +0800) Mr. Peng via Postfix-users is rumored to have said: > I have been using spamhaus, spamcop, sorbs as the RBL providers for > antispam. > But some of the customers speak to me about the FP issues caused by RBL. > Do you think the

[pfx] header_checks.pcre

2024-04-10 Thread Serhii via Postfix-users
You should use check_reverse_client_hostname_access I have the following pcre map entry: /\.googleusercontent\.com$/ REJECT policy forbids MTA with generic PTRs ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an ema

[pfx] header_checks.pcre

2024-04-10 Thread natan via Postfix-users
Hi I try block all bc.googleusercontent.com but some adress allow Is this make sense ? cat /etc/postfix/header_checks.pcre #allow /^Received:.from.mg.gitlab.com.*bc.googleusercontent.com/ DUNNO #reject /^Received:.from.*bc.googleusercontent.com/ REJECT spam/scam/419 detected I blocked b

[pfx] Re: reliable RBL

2024-04-10 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users
On 10.04.24 17:46, Mr. Peng via Postfix-users wrote: I have been using spamhaus, spamcop, sorbs as the RBL providers for antispam. But some of the customers speak to me about the FP issues caused by RBL. Do you think the three RBL above are reliable in a practical system? I use them on many ser

[pfx] reliable RBL

2024-04-10 Thread Serhii via Postfix-users
It is kind of off topic, but to my opinion there is no FP-less RBL available. Consider moving to scoring system to not rely on listing at only one blocklist. -- Send unsolicited bulk email to carl...@at.encryp.ch ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postf

[pfx] reliable RBL

2024-04-10 Thread Mr. Peng via Postfix-users
I have been using spamhaus, spamcop, sorbs as the RBL providers for antispam. But some of the customers speak to me about the FP issues caused by RBL. Do you think the three RBL above are reliable in a practical system? Thanks ___ Postfix-users mailing l