On 2025 Feb 4, 10:07, Peter via Postfix-users wrote:
> On 4/02/25 09:53, Emmanuel Seyman via Postfix-users wrote:
> >* Josh Good via Postfix-users [31/01/2025 00:37] :
> >
> >>But I'm sure it is archived privately in many places. If just this was
> >>read
s retro setup, until
a discovery is made (and no, I dare not venture myself into the rabbit
hole of compiling vintage Postfix on a vintage system, in case anyone
wonders about that).
Best regards,
--
Josh Good
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-
here, to ask whether someone has in his archives an RPM
package of Postfix targeted to Red Hat 6.2 (classic edition)?
It would be much appreciated if anyone can help in the unearthing of
such an antique piece of software!
Best regards,
--
Josh Good
628863075
Timeout : 7200 (sec)
Verify return code: 0 (ok)
Extended master secret: no
---
250 STARTTLS
421 Exceeded allowable connection time, disconnecting.
closed
---> Which means they also support TLS 1.2 in SMTP.
Perhaps they re-evaluated their decision and are keeping TLS 1.0 for
SMTP? Who knows!
Regards,
--
Josh Good
e legitimate email from TLS-1.2-capable
> senders.
Well, there is also the third option, the kamikaze approach: we're
disabling TLS 1.0, and while we are at it we will also disable this
"backdoor" we just found of "plain text" connections to our world-facing
SMTP servers... Risk assessments?, what are those? This is security!
--
Josh Good
he following days,
for if they (Rhenus) disable plain text SMTP in their publicly-referenced
SMTP servers, PAIN will ensue and my urgent intervention will probably
be requested to "fix" things...
Regards,
--
Josh Good
is the second one, is that a current trend? Has rfc2487
been obsoleted and mandatory TLS is now considered "industry standard"
in publicly-referenced SMTP server?
I've tried to contact Rhenus IT Services to inquire about this, but my
phone calls haven't gone through. So I thought I may as well ask this
list if this a single case or the "new normal"...
Regards,
--
Josh Good
s are worthy
by themselves.
Regards,
--
Josh Good
o make up for the headaches
those other programs give me. Other MTAs are much harder to support.
Regards,
--
Josh Good
On 2017 Feb 12, 18:32, Dominic Raferd wrote:
> On 12 February 2017 at 12:54, Josh Good wrote:
>
> > Well, yes, SPF breaks old-style forwarding. This is well known and
> > undisputed.
> >
> > Many old-style SMTP "customs" no longer apply, like open rela
On 2017 Feb 12, 16:17, Michael Ströder wrote:
> Josh Good wrote:
> > On 2017 Feb 11, 19:18, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:
> >> So technically integrity is assured from server to server, but not between
> >> clients
> >> and server.
> >
> > T
On 2017 Feb 12, 08:14, John Allen wrote:
> Josh Good - your DKIM signaturesare showing up as invalid.
I don't see how that is possible, given that I currently do not do DKIM
signing of my posts to this list.
Perhaps did you mean to say that my posts to the list are getting a
DMARC r
lready using p=reject in their DMARC, and their users are certainly
posting to mailing lists.
So, the world is very much complicated.
--
Josh Good
bscribe to, and therefore you don't have that
info to feed into your DKIM checking procedure.
Suddenly, you are departing from a clear cut way to check DKIM and going
to a heuristics-based algorithm to do it. I can see dragons that way...
Regards,
--
Josh Good
ail in the
> primary inbox is discouraged.
OK, understood.
I manage fine without the tags, I just was curious about why not having
them when it's so common in other lists.
--
Josh Good
---
Yeah, I see that "suscribe" in the 3rd line (first quoted lin
to have it.
Regards,
--
Josh Good
mail is legit, or Paypal has been hacked to
death from the inside.
Regards,
--
Josh Good
me based on your owun published DMARC policy, and the mailing
software could wrongly assume the subscribed address of OTHER subscribers
has become stale.
So take action:
1. change "fo=1" to "fo=0".
2. remove "p=reject", or use a different subdomain/domain to post to
mailing lists.
Regards,
--
Josh Good
sending
domain is needed).
--integrity (that the message has not been altered or mutilated).
PGP is end-to-end, DKIM is not end-to-end, but MTA-to-MTA. I never said
DKIM was end-to-end.
Regards,
--
Josh Good
On 2017 Feb 12, 02:33, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Josh Good skrev den 2017-02-12 01:53:
>
> >2. Why this mailing list has never used subject tags, and very early
> >in its infancy it even stopped injecting a footer into the posts? It's
> >obvious that was not done to
On 2017 Feb 11, 20:27, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Josh Good:
> > 1. Why the mailing list software is not configured to add a List-Id
> > header?
>
> Perhaps that's because the configuration was last updated in 2005,
> at a time that List-Id was not as widely used. Let
c/rfc2919.txt
[2] See RFC7489 - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7489
[3] A DMARC policy of p=reject is known to cause trouble with so called
"indirect mail flows", of which a mailing list is the primary example -
see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7960
[4] http://marc.info/?l=postfix-users&m=107415094130714&w=2
--
Josh Good
On 2016 Nov 24, 16:58, Postfix User wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 22:04:41 +0100, Josh Good stated:
>
> >Now, having said that, there is a gotcha: the URL for the hotfix offers
> >a "Hotfix download available" button, which simply put does NOT work.
> >Microsoft s
5sum WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB948963-x64-ENU.exe
28002524ecdb2a4a4e8bd15438976123
WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB948963-x64-ENU.exe
$ sha256sum WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB948963-x64-ENU.exe
973a60f5408632d602db59db7b075ec18bbdbf0c38c4821c19265d4c8bc27168
WindowsServer2003.WindowsXP-KB948963-x64-ENU.exe
I hope all of this may be of some help to someone.
--
Josh Good
On 2016 Nov 19, 23:14, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 10:44:11PM +0100, Josh Good wrote:
>
> > Also, I've been able to replicate the problem, setting up a server with
> > Ubuntu 16.10, which defaults to Postfix 3.1.0 as MTA and OpenSSL 1.0.2g
> >
ument this problem and the solution I was
forced to adopt. It may help others who, as it happens to my clients, may
not yet be able/ready to migrate to a more modern groupware version. This
is not meant as a rant.)
Regards,
--
Josh Good
26 matches
Mail list logo
