[pfx] Re: Searching for old Postfix 2.0.6 RPM-packaged for Red Hat 6.2 (classic)

Dnia 30.01.2025 o godz. 15:36:26 Peter via Postfix-users pisze: > At any rate the current Red Hat public download server says that old > Red Hat Linux images are at > ftp://archive.download.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/, if you can find > some other way to access it. That FTP server seems to be dow

[pfx] Re: Is it possible/easy to block incoming for the real account name but accept the alias/canonical?

Dnia 26.01.2025 o godz. 16:28:14 Gerben Wierda via Postfix-users pisze: > > So, what happens is: the spammer delivers to the secondary, the secondary > delivers to the primary, the primary rejects. The secondary then sends an > undeliverable message to the sender. Then discard messages that are c

[pfx] Re: milter service connection refused

Dnia 22.01.2025 o godz. 14:22:05 Curtis Vaughan via Postfix-users pisze: > > mv opendkim opendkim-real > > I'm moving /usr/sbin/opendkim to /usr/bin/opendkim-real ? Nope, there is no > such prog there. Many starting with opendkim-. That's absolutely correct that there is no such program. If

[pfx] Re: sender_bcc_maps & recipient_bcc_maps question

Dnia 15.01.2025 o godz. 16:29:41 Florian Piekert via Postfix-users pisze: > I do not want a copy of mails from those senders. Therefore I have added > it to the sender_bcc_maps-File (expression as above). (ignorethis is an > alias for |cat > /dev/null). I don't know solution to your problem, but I

[pfx] Re: Is possible with postfix to do port-based routing?

Dnia 20.12.2024 o godz. 15:28:31 Etienne Gladu via Postfix-users pisze: > > it worked! > I had to replace Reply-To by Return-To, but it works! There's no "Return-To" header among standard email headers. There is "Reply-To", to indicate the address where the reply sent by the (human) recipient sh

[pfx] Re: DHL messed their DNS?

Dnia 11.12.2024 o godz. 08:44:48 Tobi via Postfix-users pisze: > I know that this is not a postfix issue, but I have the hope that > someone from DHL is on this list :-) I think you would have better chance sending this to "mailop" list. You can subscribe at https://www.mailop.org/ -- Regards,

[pfx] Re: chroot and debian: a blast from the past

Dnia 10.12.2024 o godz. 01:58:58 Michael Tokarev via Postfix-users pisze: > >Hm... read-only /etc? How do you reconfigure anything then? > > Remount-rw, configure, remount-ro. There's no need to configure > anything during regular system operations, actual time when > configuration is happening i

[pfx] Re: chroot and debian: a blast from the past

Dnia 10.12.2024 o godz. 01:21:51 Michael Tokarev via Postfix-users pisze: > It redirected a few (maybe just one) runtime-info file from > /etc to /run - this way, /etc can be read-only (I used RO > /etc for years before systemd). Hm... read-only /etc? How do you reconfigure anything then? -- Rega

[pfx] Re: virtual alias expansion explicit prevention

Dnia 5.12.2024 o godz. 19:02:26 Tomasz Pala via Postfix-users pisze: > > O[office] -> B,X,Y,Z,S1,S2 > X[empl01] -> B,X,Y,Z,S1,S2 > Y[empl02] -> B,X,Y,Z,S1,S2 > Z[empl03] -> B,X,Y,Z,S1,S2 > S1[sup01] -> B,S1 > S2[sup02] -> B,S2 > > where Sn are in a form of sn+off...@example.net. > > > Scenario

[pfx] Re: virtual alias expansion explicit prevention

Dnia 5.12.2024 o godz. 16:49:45 Tomasz Pala via Postfix-users pisze: > I'm not sure if it's not a XY-kind of problem, so I hope I've described > all the relevant rules we're trying to follow (bearing in mind the real > setup is much more complicated and seems to grow exponentially). Maybe it's ju

[pfx] Re: Problems Receiving Email But Only from Microsoft/Outlook [lost connection after EHLO]

Dnia 3.12.2024 o godz. 17:38:40 Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze: > (*) Someone roported long ago that they fixed an obscure Postfix > networking problem by plugging the server into a different port. Hm... candidate for another case of "500 mile email" ? -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa

[pfx] Re: [ext] Re: Odd bounce referrring to BareLinefeedsAreIllegal

Dnia 27.11.2024 o godz. 12:02:27 Ralf Hildebrandt via Postfix-users pisze: > > > Do you have some front-end before your Postfix (for example some UTM device > > that is filtering mail traffic)? > > No Well, then maybe the Exchange server filtering the outgoing mail on the sender's side did the s

[pfx] Re: [ext] Re: Odd bounce referrring to BareLinefeedsAreIllegal

Dnia 27.11.2024 o godz. 10:42:37 Ralf Hildebrandt via Postfix-users pisze: > * Ralf Hildebrandt via Postfix-users : > > > I checked the occurence of "queueid: canceled" in my logs and found: > > 20241112 > > Logging: the cleanup server now logs "queueid: removed (reason)" where > "reason" is ei

[pfx] Re: mail records on CNAME

Dnia 4.11.2024 o godz. 10:07:35 Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze: > > if I make a CNAME as, > > > > sub.xyz.com CNAME to xyz.net > > > > and, xyz.net has its own MX and SPF records. > > > > my question is, for this DNS setup, will sub.xyz.com uses MX and SPF of > > xyz.net for its mail ho

[pfx] Re: mydestination shared domains?

Dnia 3.11.2024 o godz. 05:51:50 David Chmelik via Postfix-users pisze: > > I read an article saying that documentation is wrong: can't add extra > domains to $mydestination or not only do they loop back to $mydomain, but > apparently doesn't set properly rather than loops back from itself to

[pfx] Re: User unknown in local recipient table (in reply to RCPT TO command)

Dnia 29.10.2024 o godz. 12:53:00 Ken Gillett via Postfix-users pisze: > $ postconf alias_maps local_recipient_maps mydomain > alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases > local_recipient_maps = proxy:unix:passwd.byname $alias_maps > mydomain = home > > $ postconf myhostname myorigin mydestination > myhostname

[pfx] Re: smtp_tls_security_level defaults question

Something bad happened to the list (?), as your message seems to be repeated multiple times, with Chinese characters prepended to the subject and list footer appended to the body multiple times. -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa r...@rafa.eu.org -- "In a million years, when kids go to school, they'r

[pfx] Re: Postfix and sasl question

Dnia 23.10.2024 o godz. 10:51:38 Ivan Ionut via Postfix-users pisze: > > Well, yes I do have submission service on the same server... and I > do have disabled SASL on port 25 and my logs on failed attempts are > something like this: > > Oct 23 08:15:12 myhost postfix/submission/smtpd[192]: wa

[pfx] Re: Delay when sending mail via email client

Dnia 16.10.2024 o godz. 15:01:06 Dominic Preston via Postfix-users pisze: > > Thanks, I'm not currently running a DNS resolver on the server, but if the > unresponsive PTR record issue persists I'll look into Unbound or maybe > Dnsmasq. No, no. If you are running a mail server, you *should* run y

[pfx] Re: [RFC, sketch] IPv6 only trust of mail network

Dnia 15.10.2024 o godz. 18:28:37 Nico Schottelius via Postfix-users pisze: > > > Your comparison to IPv6 vs IPv4 isn't very good, as everybody tries to do > > their best to level the barrier between IPv6 and IPv4, not strenghten > > it. > > tbh, I think this is only true to a small degree for DS-

[pfx] Re: [RFC, sketch] IPv6 only trust of mail network

Dnia 15.10.2024 o godz. 12:36:12 Nico Schottelius via Postfix-users pisze: > > You got a point there, there would be a barrier between classic email > and "secure email" (or whatever term comes to one's mind). > > Actually a bit similar as the split between the IPv6 and IPv4 world - > hence my ar

[pfx] Re: [RFC, sketch] IPv6 only trust of mail network

Dnia 15.10.2024 o godz. 15:51:13 Gary R. Schmidt via Postfix-users pisze: > > Maybe lobby the ITU to have a standard (or whatever) created? ITU already created a standard for e-mail long ago. It's called X.400. Wasn't too widely adopted. I'm not sure if anybody is still using this. -- Regards,

[pfx] Re: [RFC, sketch] IPv6 only trust of mail network

Dnia 14.10.2024 o godz. 13:03:48 Nico Schottelius via Postfix-users pisze: > > In a nutshell the idea is to reuse the very > old, existing "trust of web" idea and mix it together with IPv6 only > mail services as follows resulting into the following setup: So, basically you want to build a "walle

[pfx] Re: filtering maillog events from yesterday

Dnia 10.10.2024 o godz. 15:31:08 Gomes, Rich via Postfix-users pisze: > Good catch! > > Mine is in this format: > Oct 10 11:30:36 Then probably $(date +"%b %e") instead of $(date +"%Y-%m-%d") will work. Or even better, put a ^ sign before $ to ensure it starts at the beginning of the line. -- Re

[pfx] Re: filtering maillog events from yesterday

Dnia 10.10.2024 o godz. 15:12:53 Gomes, Rich via Postfix-users pisze: > I am trying to "trap" certain errors\events in the maillog and send them as a > daily report. > The issue I am having is only trapping the errors from the last 24 hours. > Here is of the events I am trying, which doesnt show a

[pfx] Re: XCLIENT and permit_sasl_authenticated

Dnia 30.09.2024 o godz. 18:53:29 Antonin VERRIER via Postfix-users pisze: > For context, I'm using Dovecot submission service, which handles > connections from SMTP client and, if authentication is successful, > proxies them to a dedicated Postfix port and provides client data > using XCLIENT. > >

[pfx] Re: RBLs at smtp level

Dnia 7.09.2024 o godz. 08:25:44 Gilgongo via Postfix-users pisze: > I notice Spamhaus say that for smaller hosts, RBL blocking at smtp level is > not recommended, and instead it’s better to use a milter for RBL checking. > > https://docs.spamhaus.com/datasets/docs/source/40-real-world-usage/Publi

[pfx] Re: Is possible with postfix to do port-based routing?

Dnia 15.08.2024 o godz. 20:30:50 Etienne Gladu via Postfix-users pisze: > In short, I want postfix to change the recipient of all email going through > port 7025, 7026, etc > In exemple : email came from port 7025, then redirect/change recipient to > d...@test.ca > if its 7026, redirect/change re

[pfx] Re: openarc and forwarding to gmail

Dnia 4.08.2024 o godz. 15:38:58 Alex via Postfix-users pisze: > > Buit this has one HUGE disadvantage, that is so obvious that I always > > wonder > > how people who advise to do this can not mention it? > > > > Scalability? Load on local server? That POP3 is unencrypted? No. That you have to gi

[pfx] Re: openarc and forwarding to gmail

Dnia 4.08.2024 o godz. 20:14:34 Peter via Postfix-users pisze: > My best advice when forwarding to gmail is to instead configure the > gmail account to fetch the mail. You will need to enable POP3 (in > dovecot or whatever your IMAP service is) as gmail will not fetch > from an IMAP server, then

[pfx] Re: Trouble blocking spammer domain

Dnia 30.07.2024 o godz. 16:19:01 John Thorvald Wodder II via Postfix-users pisze: > The "access" file currently contains REJECT lines for both > "spamgateway.nil" (no leading period) and ".spamgateway.nil" (leading > period), and I did the postmap-and-restart dance after updating it, but > the e-m

[pfx] Re: Do you reject DMARC failures?

Dnia 30.07.2024 o godz. 12:38:15 Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users pisze: > >I filter messages only based on RBLs, manual blocklists and content > >filtering (SA + many custom rules). And as for the latter, the messages are > >sent to spam folder, never rejected. Rejections are based only on

[pfx] Re: Do you reject DMARC failures?

Dnia 30.07.2024 o godz. 10:23:28 Gilgongo via Postfix-users pisze: > What do others do with DMARC? I'm inclined to just gradually turn up the SA > scores on SPF/DKIM failures instead, if only because > Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DMARC isn't included in SA by default - and > presumably for a reaso

[pfx] Re: #5.7.0 Must issue a STARTTLS command first (in reply to MAIL FROM command) - how to repair?

Dnia 29.07.2024 o godz. 16:15:32 export--- via Postfix-users pisze: > Thank you ALL for replies. > > I added > smtpd_tls_security_level = may > > but still the same. You should use "smtp_tls_security_level", not "smtpd_tls_security_level". > # TLS parameters > smtpd_tls_security_level = may > s

[pfx] Re: #5.7.0 Must issue a STARTTLS command first (in reply to MAIL FROM command) - how to repair?

Dnia 30.07.2024 o godz. 00:00:58 Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users pisze: > > No, because the servers in question not only don't offer STARTTLS in > EHLO, but also refuse STARTTLS if you try. There aren't many such > systems, but they exist. Then they can't accept mail at all? If they reject pla

[pfx] Re: #5.7.0 Must issue a STARTTLS command first (in reply to MAIL FROM command) - how to repair?

Dnia 29.07.2024 o godz. 22:25:37 Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users pisze: > It was a response from a remote server refusing to accept delivery, > so, the fix (if not already in place) is: > > smtp_tls_security_level = may > > however, the remote server might be one of the broken ones both req

[pfx] Re: RFC logs_check

Dnia 24.07.2024 o godz. 00:14:51 Bob via Postfix-users pisze: > I want "Kill on Sight".  > > Fastest way to me would be Postfix says it logged a connection from > fluffy.cuddly.port.raping.internet-measurement.com calls my script with > the IP address and they get stuffed up IPTables. Despite wha

[pfx] Re: Cyrus SASL summary

Dnia 17.07.2024 o godz. 17:15:07 Kenneth Porter via Postfix-users pisze: > On 7/16/2024 8:59 AM, Scott Kitterman via Postfix-users wrote: > >I didn't write this, but this, FYI, seems to be the most current distro > >documentation on how to configure it: > > > >https://wiki.debian.org/PostfixAndSASL

[pfx] Re: How to bounce e-mail when using catchall

Dnia 12.07.2024 o godz. 08:55:08 Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users pisze: > I want that mail sent to users who do not have a valid address (like > when they are not on ldap) to bounce back, like it happens by > default, but I'd also like these mail to be delivered to an specific >

[pfx] Re: Need help debugging Python in Postfix

Dnia 8.07.2024 o godz. 22:44:46 Simon Thorpe (PST) via Postfix-users pisze: > Ahh ok, then I need to do more reading. I essentially want the following... > > All emails to {alias}@mydomain.com sent onto any of a list of other > domains, i.e. {alias}@domain1.com, {alias}@domain2.com, etc. > > If

[pfx] Re: Handing off via localhost:10025 to spamassassin for scanning failure

Dnia 28.06.2024 o godz. 00:16:31 Curtis J Blank via Postfix-users pisze: > When "inet_protocols = all" the connection to filter.mynetwork.local > localhost > port 10025 to hand off the message to spamassassin for scanning fails with > "Relay access denied". What I finally noticed is that the connec

[pfx] Re: No email forwarding?

Dnia 23.06.2024 o godz. 12:20:37 Bill Cole via Postfix-users pisze: > Transparent forwarding is infeasible of the modern net. Forwarding > using SRS or encapsulation is still usable if you are willing to > accept that those methods are imperfect and add complexity to a mail > system. > > Forwardin

[pfx] Re: question for a directive in master.cf

Dnia 21.06.2024 o godz. 19:06:38 Jeff Peng via Postfix-users pisze: > > >If you want to enable them, you have to uncomment ALL lines for > >submission > >service to work correctly. > > just further, for smtps service, can i just comment out all of > options to enable it? Yes, you should. -- Reg

[pfx] Re: question for a directive in master.cf

Dnia 21.06.2024 o godz. 07:54:40 Jeff Peng via Postfix-users pisze: > for these options for submission in master.cf: > > submission inet n - y - - smtpd > # -o syslog_name=postfix/submission > # -o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt > -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes >

[pfx] Re: SPF hostname and domainname

Dnia 21.06.2024 o godz. 18:45:15 Peter via Postfix-users pisze: > SPF/DKIM/DMARC Checklist for (IMO) the best chance of getting your > mail to be accepted: > > 1. HELO banner should pass SPF. > > 2. Envelope Sender should pass SPF. > > 3. Envelope Sender domain should align with the From: hea

[pfx] Re: REJECT sending mails to no-reply accounts

Dnia 20.06.2024 o godz. 09:08:39 Bastian Blank via Postfix-users pisze: > Then you can not use this e-mail address as envelope sender. People > will do sender callout and then reject all e-mail with this as sender. Sender callout is discouraged now, because it is considered aggressive behavior by

[pfx] Re: REJECT sending mails to no-reply accounts

Dnia 20.06.2024 o godz. 08:51:33 Alexander Leidinger via Postfix-users pisze: > > This implies that the organization / company is willing to spend > money on having someone available to actually respond / provide > support. For a lot of the use cases I would say even a mail to > ticket system gate

[pfx] Re: Troubleshooting roundcube connections to postfix

Dnia 16.06.2024 o godz. 20:54:34 Paul Schmehl via Postfix-users pisze: > > The odd thing is, I don’t see any connection attempts at all in the mail > logs. May seem a strange question, but it's always first thing I check in case I don't see any connection attempt in logs: Is your Roundcube really

[pfx] Re: dmarc domain question

Dnia 3.06.2024 o godz. 06:26:53 Jeff P via Postfix-users pisze: > > I would like to set a seperated DMARC for xxx.eu.org. > But I have no control over the sender smtp server, so dkim is not > possible to be added. > do you think if it's still right to add a dmarc? If DKIM is absent, DMARC will b

[pfx] Re: dmarc domain question

Dnia 2.06.2024 o godz. 07:19:38 Jeff P via Postfix-users pisze: > > I am using a subdomain xxx.eu.org for sending email. > Though I have not set a dmarc for xxx.eu.org, but gmail says DMARC pass. > So i checked that eu.org does have a DMARC record: > > _dmarc.eu.org.7200IN

[pfx] Re: how does smtpd know the connection is a submission request, or a MX request?

Dnia 24.05.2024 o godz. 20:41:57 Northwind via Postfix-users pisze: > my guess, submission clients were using ehlo, and a mx client uses > helo command. so postfix differ them based on this command? They connect to different Postfix services. Submission clients connect to port 587 or 465 (or any o

[pfx] Re: Strengthen email system security

Dnia 23.05.2024 o godz. 15:18:36 Northwind via Postfix-users pisze: > how to implement that a policy server? thanks. My script is very simple, I just took a sample policy server script in Perl included with Postfix distribution and added code to ask Dovecot about currently active IMAP sessions. I

[pfx] Re: Strengthen email system security

Dnia 23.05.2024 o godz. 11:03:48 Peter via Postfix-users pisze: > > You can implement a policy daemon (such as postfwd) which can add > limits to help in case a password does get found. This can shut > down a user account before it gets used to send too much SPAM. > > If you know that all of you

[pfx] Re: TLS for SMTP Outbound -- Only One tlsproxy

Dnia 21.05.2024 o godz. 16:38:21 Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze: > > delays=0.01/2639/25/0.41 > > delays=0.01/2639/25/0.58 > > delays=0.01/2641/25/0.58 > > delays=0.01/2644/25/0.69 > > delays=0.01/2643/25/0.58 > > delays=0.01/2640/25/0.57 [...] > c=25s. It takes a whopping 25 eco

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

Dnia 21.05.2024 o godz. 22:27:04 Henri Schomäcker via Postfix-users pisze: > > So what we need to do is to limit the sending rate to all MX servers > under protection.outlook.com. Postfix does not support this, Wietse probably could explain why. You can select a transport by destination domain, b

[pfx] Re: Mails ending up in spam when sending to gmail address

Dnia 16.05.2024 o godz. 12:05:52 Peter via Postfix-users pisze: > >On my side the email is accepted from here, and relayed, Rspamd > >does sign it, and Postfix's last message in the log is a message > >sent delivered, and removed from my queue. I check my test Gmail > >account, and the message is i

[pfx] Re: reliable RBL

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: Aliases with "@" in it

Dnia 9.04.2024 o godz. 11:11:31 Paul van der Vlis via Postfix-users pisze: > When I want to make an alias, I try this in /etc/aliases: > "al...@domain.nl": j...@domain.nl > But when I sent mail, I get a bounce with "user unknown". > > When I do this in /etc/aliases: > alias: j...@domain.nl > Th

[pfx] Re: Setting up another "smarthost" with Postfix

Dnia 28.03.2024 o godz. 06:39:47 Samuel Goodies via Postfix-users pisze: > So far I've chosen Internet Site as my Debian configuration when the package > installed. > I added my main domain name, though this postfix box will pass mail for > several other domains as well. > I edited /etc/postfix/

[pfx] Re: Setting up another "smarthost" with Postfix

Dnia 27.03.2024 o godz. 13:02:18 Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze: > > 1. From what I've read there's not a 'smarthost' option in the > > setup config. Would I just choose 'Internet Site'? Or does it > > matter at all if I'm just going to monkey with the conf anyway? > >

[pfx] Re: strict access restrictions and bounces

Dnia 27.03.2024 o godz. 11:57:22 Daniel Marquez-Klaka via Postfix-users pisze: > True as well that mailman can restrict senders to list members only > but I have a couple of open lists that should be addressable by all > participating domains/company’s, no one else. If you have a list of domains f

[pfx] Re: strict access restrictions and bounces

Dnia 25.03.2024 o godz. 16:11:47 Daniel Marquez-Klaka via Postfix-users pisze: > 2 postfix mail server, one, mail-server1, is connected to the > internet, the second, > calling it list-server1, which serves a few mailing lists, is only > reachable thru > mail-server1. > > On mail-server1 a transpo

[pfx] Re: smtpd filter orig_client

Dnia 19.03.2024 o godz. 11:35:16 Reg Inaldo via Postfix-users pisze: > In the transaction (eg):  mta-k postfix/smtpd[23771]: 97F808837: > client=localhost[127.0.0.1], orig_client=localhost[127.0.0.1] > > I want to reject anything on the "orig_client" basis where: > *orig_client**=localhost*[127.0.

[pfx] Re: collect emails in maildir folder without delivering them to user

Dnia 19.03.2024 o godz. 07:10:53 Fourhundred Thecat via Postfix-users pisze: > > On the server, I have one unix user, and multiple aliases defined in > /etc/aliases, so that I can use different email addresses for different > purposes. > > All these aliases are delivered to the users home / maild

[pfx] Re: Change unknown_address_reject_code on a smarthost to a 5xx reply?

Dnia 15.02.2024 o godz. 15:27:48 Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users pisze: > > - it took 4h for the sender to get a notification that the domain was not > found > - after they "corrected" it by sending a second email with the correct > address, they > still got mail delivery delayed notification

[pfx] Re: ARC or DKIM or SRS?

Dnia 11.02.2024 o godz. 17:47:05 Alex via Postfix-users pisze: > My concern would be with multiple MX records for the same domain - is it > possible it would come back to try again with another MX and be delayed yet > again? MX are the addresses that *receive* mail for a given domain, not the addr

[pfx] Re: Is there a way to reject an internal domain on our border MXes

Dnia 4.02.2024 o godz. 11:00:39 Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users pisze: > > Well, I'm an old school type... :) I prefer to ssh to the server and launch > > mutt or something similar to access my mail :) > > That's fine, I also use mutt (in fact when replying to this message), > but for me mutt i

[pfx] Re: Is there a way to reject an internal domain on our border MXes

Dnia 3.02.2024 o godz. 12:59:27 Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users pisze: > > These days, users are far better off with delivery to an IMAP store that > is not tied directly to any login account they may or may not have. > Perhaps they authenticate to Dovecot via PAM, but the mail store should > o

[pfx] Re: Is there a way to reject an internal domain on our border MXes

Dnia 3.02.2024 o godz. 10:33:58 Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users pisze: > The "local" transport is a legacy Sendmail-compatibilty interface, > and should generally be avoided. Why avoided? If you have local Unix users on your server, and you want those users to receive mail, this is the most eas

[pfx] Re: Feature Request: Adjustable Header Log Size Limit in INFO/WARN/REJECT Header_Check

Dnia 24.01.2024 o godz. 23:21:10 Gerald Galster via Postfix-users pisze: > > As the amount of email increases it can be difficult to distinguish mails > to or from a correspondent. In this case it would help a lot to display > the subject as well but that's not part of envelope data. Therefore it'

[pfx] Re: Feature Request: Adjustable Header Log Size Limit in INFO/WARN/REJECT Header_Check

Dnia 24.01.2024 o godz. 08:20:33 Matthias Schneider via Postfix-users pisze: > > Upon reviewing the code, it appears there are only one limit on > vstring_sprintf, three limits on msg_info in the code, whereas the rest of > the %.200s limits are present on msg_warn lines. My request stems from > t

[pfx] Re: Preparation of switch from OpenSMTPd to Postfix -> syntax/behaviuor of virtual_alias_maps

Dnia 21.01.2024 o godz. 23:35:39 Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users pisze: > I have also read http://www.postfix.org/VIRTUAL_README.html and this > states that with virtual alias mode i can have the same local part in an > email address and deliver them to different unix users, but i can still > use

[pfx] Re: improper command pipelining

Dnia 15.01.2024 o godz. 09:34:06 Admin Beckspaced via Postfix-users pisze: > do i need to be worried? As your logs clearly show it's Shodan, then either ignore it or simply block it right away. -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa r...@rafa.eu.org -- "In a million years, when kids go to school, they'r

[pfx] Re: 25 years today

Dnia 14.12.2023 o godz. 08:20:26 Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze: > As a few on this list may recall, it is 25 years ago today that the > "IBM secure mailer" had its public beta release. This was accompanied > by a nice article in the New York Times business section. [...] > That was a long t

[pfx] Re: printer ip SMTP AUTH / mynetworks question

Dnia 13.12.2023 o godz. 09:15:52 Bill Cole via Postfix-users pisze: > > No AUTH offered. Which is fine, because one should not offer AUTH > over an unencrypted session. However, your printer saw that and > instead of using STARTTLS, it hung up. That's bad. It should have > used STARTTLS to get a u

[pfx] Re: Milter own Postfix-prepended Received

Dnia 10.12.2023 o godz. 22:16:27 Carlos Velasco via Postfix-users pisze: > > >That is because every Milter in the real world gets the client info > >from the smfi_connect() callback function and from Milter macros, > >instead of parsing Received: headers. > That statement is absolutely false. > Ma

[pfx] Re: postsrsd

Dnia 6.12.2023 o godz. 01:00:21 Doug Hardie via Postfix-users pisze: > The config files (conf and conf.sample) all had dates > of 14 Nov so I suspect they were replaced. I don't know what the original > files contained anymore. Does the upgrade save the previous config files anywhere as backups?

[pfx] Re: How to restrict relay domains for sendmail command ?

Dnia 5.12.2023 o godz. 20:14:45 Cowbay via Postfix-users pisze: > > I want this mail server to relay mails for specific domains only and > all the mails are relayed to another mail server ($relayhost > configured in main.cf). > > I found that there is no $sendmail_relay_restrictions configuratio

[pfx] Re: localhost rejected ?

Dnia 4.12.2023 o godz. 14:44:44 lejeczek via Postfix-users pisze: > > I can send email to root@localhost and I thought it was all good but > today a tool/client wanted to send an email to that address and it > got: > ... > connect from localhost[127.0.0.1] > NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from localhost[1

[pfx] Re: IPv6 and Cloud server CPU

Dnia 23.11.2023 o godz. 11:16:42 DL Neil via Postfix-users pisze: > Q1: > can an email server be run off IPv6 (exclusively) these days, or are > IPv4 + v6 alternatives necessary? Not possible to use IPv6 only server for any purpose. There are still a LOT of sites that run IPv4 only, and end users

[pfx] Re: www.postfix.org outage

Dnia 22.11.2023 o godz. 04:46:36 Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users pisze: > The Postfix website is available again. The company hosting the server > hardware informed me that there are "some issues with the PXE feature > with this server model", whatever that means exactly, which their staff > was a

[pfx] Re: Mail not for my domain

Dnia 20.11.2023 o godz. 22:00:01 Joseph Castry via Postfix-users pisze: > For exemple, I receive mails from oysu...@jipstalles.de > to jcrh...@izac.fr > on my mailbox cont...@jcingenierie.fr > > How can I bloc

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

Dnia 15.11.2023 o godz. 20:02:44 Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users pisze: > Funnily i just now got while sending a mail to not more than about > i think two dozen gmail accounts: > > Nov 15 18:31:54 postfix/smtp[30872]: 32CC41605F: host > gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[66.102.1.27] said: 421-4.7.2

[pfx] Re: Why does Postfix evaluate relay restrictions despite an early permit in recipient restriction?

Dnia 11.11.2023 o godz. 17:58:04 Matthias Nagel via Postfix-users pisze: > > Thanks for clarification. What happens if Postfix find a PERMIT in an > earlier restriction list (which shortcuts that list), but then finds a > DENY in a later restriction list? What takes precedence? The earlier > PERMI

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

Dnia 5.11.2023 o godz. 13:53:46 Noel Butler via Postfix-users pisze: > If correctly forwarded it does not break SPF, since correctly > forwarding rewrites the sender, I was an early adopter of SPF and > always used hard-fail, no lists have rejected my posts from SPF > (trust me, if they did, I sur

[pfx] Re: Connect Postfix to Dovecot SASL with TLS?

Dnia 3.11.2023 o godz. 08:00:43 Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze: > Nick Lockheart via Postfix-users: > > What are the Postfix settings for TLS between Postfix and Dovecot SASL? > > This is not documented, therefore not implemented. What is your > threat model: am attacker has privileged acc

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

Dnia 2.11.2023 o godz. 09:42:01 Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users pisze: > (once more: DKIM applies on header From:, SPF on envelope from:). And DMARC requires that both be identical (actually, from the same domain - user part may be different), which makes things even harder. -- Regards,

[pfx] Re: read postscreen database?

Dnia 31.10.2023 o godz. 14:10:40 Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze: > > Or copy the file with a dumb program, and use postmnap to dump that > copy. Caution: the file contains holes and may grow when copied, > as holes are filled in with nulls. When GNU cp is used with --sparse=auto parameter,

[pfx] Re: logging username in a failed smtp attemps

Dnia 24.10.2023 o godz. 11:32:58 Eric Doutreleau via Postfix-users pisze: > Oct  5 11:07:52 hermes postfix/smtpd[277411]: warning: > unknown[122.179.129.110]: SASL LOGIN authentication failed: > authentication failure > > There s no username logged. > > Is there a way to log this username? Cyrus

[pfx] Re: Allowing receiving mail but I prevent sasl authentication

Dnia 19.10.2023 o godz. 17:21:41 Ivan Ionut via Postfix-users pisze: > > Hi, is there a way to block an ip(or ip cidr) to do sasl > authentication but allowing to receive mail from it. > > I'm asking because some times I may completely block the god guys > from my firewall. There is no need for

[pfx] Re: SMTP Require TLS Option?

Dnia 19.10.2023 o godz. 09:56:49 Joachim Lindenberg via Postfix-users pisze: > > I disagree. Of course your points are valid, to some extent: > - without additional authenticated encryption like SMTP-DANE, your > end-to-end encrypted messages are only protected w.r.t. confidentiality > (except s

[pfx] Re: SMTP Require TLS Option?

Dnia 18.10.2023 o godz. 19:31:52 Joachim Lindenberg via Postfix-users pisze: > Thunderbird "advertises" end-to-end-encryption only and confuses users > that actually use/benefit from SMTP-DANE where it tells "unencrypted". IMHO correctly. Email that isn't end-to-end encrypted *is* actually unencr

[pfx] Re: Domain-Specific inbound relay host rules

Dnia 15.10.2023 o godz. 08:52:18 B Williams via Postfix-users pisze: > There is a spam network that has figured out that they can bypass my spam > filtering service by ignoring the MX record and just sending mail directly > to the mail server. Pretty sneaky. [...] > Open to any and all ideas! The

[pfx] Re: *.mail.protection.outlook.com reporting "452 4.5.3 Too many recipients (AS780090)" for many domains

Dnia 11.10.2023 o godz. 15:11:27 Josef Vybíhal via Postfix-users pisze: > Hi, no clue about MS service, but it does not seem postfix related. > You might want to direct this to the mailop list - > https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop It can be possibly related to some failure at Microsoft, disc

[pfx] Re: Content_filter selection based on sender domain

Dnia 10.10.2023 o godz. 18:56:23 Pedro David Marco via Postfix-users pisze: > Hi all, > does anyone know how to use different content_filter based on sender domain? Anything that's used as a content filter knows the sender domain, so I would write a wrapper script that calls the proper filter base

[pfx] Re: Problem setting up postfix on arch linux to forward mail to my gmail account

Dnia 9.10.2023 o godz. 00:51:13 Polarian via Postfix-users pisze: > here is a little unknown, one second it seems like you are trying to > send emails under your domain name, and the next second it simply seems > you want to be able to use a gmail address within a piece of software. For me, it is

[pfx] Re: Problem setting up postfix on arch linux to forward mail to my gmail account

Dnia 8.10.2023 o godz. 09:18:07 mwoodpatrick--- via Postfix-users pisze: > I want to be able to have mail sent by applications running on my server be > able to send mail from that server to my email account. If all you need is just to be able to send mail from applications to a particular email

[pfx] Re: UGFzc3dvcmQ6

Dnia 13.09.2023 o godz. 12:54:39 DL Neil via Postfix-users pisze: > unknown[146.247.146.134]: SASL LOGIN authentication failed: UGFzc3dvcmQ6 > 14-0-135-011.static.pccw-hkt.com[14.0.135.11]: SASL LOGIN > authentication failed: UGFzc3dvcmQ6 > ... > > What is the setting to get rid of these dozens of

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

Dnia 10.09.2023 o godz. 10:20:19 Bill Sommerfeld via Postfix-users pisze: > There's another possible workaround, if the ISP won't budge (or even > if it does and you still find yourself blocked based on your > providers IP reputation): some service providers may let you > purchase outbound mail rel

[pfx] Re: Relay access denied (Dovecot)

Dnia 4.09.2023 o godz. 15:38:38 lejeczek via Postfix-users pisze: > > I did have '#virtual_mailbox_domains' - being amateur in my mind it > did not make sense, since I wanted Postfix to relay on Dovecot, to > have it & removed those. [...] > If I add more, like 'virtual_mailbox_maps', etc. then i

  1   2   >