[pfx] Re: Baffling outgoing mail rejection of PDF attachment

2025-02-11 Thread Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users
On 2/11/25 11:33, Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users wrote: I have mime_header_checks = pcre:/etc/postfix/mime_header_checks, but that file contains only the following: /name=[^>]*\.(bat|com|exe|dll|vbs|xls|zip)/ REJECT This regexp isn't anchored at the end. So it matches (among other things)

[pfx] Re: Selection of a custom smtp-transport based on recipient addresse's MX with check_recipient_mx_access doesn't work

2024-05-21 Thread Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users
On 5/21/24 13:27, Henri Schomäcker via Postfix-users wrote: So what we need to do is to limit the sending rate to all MX servers under protection.outlook.com. But it does not work with my configuration, all mails are still beeing sent directly one after another, and I can't find out why. So

[pfx] Re: SMTP Smuggling disclosure process & VINCE

2023-12-23 Thread Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users
On 12/22/23 17:30, Vijay S Sarvepalli via Postfix-users wrote: Arguably the second server is at fault here for “SPF” signing two emails, nevertheless the vulnerability is due to the combinatorial or Composition Attack as Wietse has identified. SPF does not involve any per-message signatures.

[pfx] Re: sasl_passwd hash

2023-12-17 Thread Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users
On 12/17/23 05:45, saunders.nicholas--- via Postfix-users wrote: Would you be able to point me to anyone there, or a contact? I'm not seeing any contact information. https://www.cyrusimap.org/sasl/ has a "support/community" link. It points to the general Cyrus IMAP support communities: https

[pfx] Re: Postfix mails accepted for delivery, but never received

2023-09-10 Thread Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users
On 9/10/23 08:22, Bill Cole via Postfix-users wrote: On 2023-09-10 at 04:28:38 UTC-0400 (Sun, 10 Sep 2023 15:28:38 +0700) Jesper Hansen via Postfix-users is rumored to have said: I simply sit on their fiber and does not relaying anything through them. Yes, but your packets traverse their rou

[pfx] Re: Comcast still 421 throttling (RL000001) multiple recipients.

2023-08-27 Thread Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users
On 8/27/23 20:50, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: I am told that Comcast have raised the limits somewhat, and it should no longer be necessary to set the recipient limit to 1. I expect you should now be able to get away with something more reasonable, like 10 or worst-case 5, unless you

[pfx] Re: Comcast still 421 throttling (RL000001) multiple recipients.

2023-08-27 Thread Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users
Thanks for your prompt responses. On 8/27/23 00:13, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: Would it be sufficient to never send more than 1 recipient per mesage, thus never trigger their temporary "block all mail" strategy, and avoid the need for the kludges described here? That's unclear. I'

[pfx] Comcast still 421 throttling (RL000001) multiple recipients.

2023-08-26 Thread Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users
About three years ago there was a thread on postfix-users ("Comcast 421 throttling multiple recipients") discussing a low-traffic site having difficulties sending to multiple recipients at comcast in a single smtp session. The thread starts here: https://www.mail-archive.com/postfix-users@