Re: Port 587 submit setup

2010-11-08 Thread JunkYardMail1
Here is my personal MX & MSA on single Linux box. /etc/postfix/ is null /etc/postfix-msa/ is the mail submission agent on port 587 and smpts on port 465 /etc/postfix-mx/ is the mail exchanger on port 25 /etc/postfix/main.cf: # Mail Submission Agent (MSA) # Mail Exchanger (MX) master_service_d

Re: RBL Spam question

2010-11-03 Thread JunkYardMail1
One of my favorite anti spam measures is auto add repeat RBL hits, no PTR hits, etc. to system firewall. Here are a few entire network permanent firewall blocks for example as well. ARIN--Level3-Sendlabs-DynDNS.org___-CIDR[63.209.253.224/27] ARIN--Level3-Sendlabs-DynDNS.org___-CIDR[63.211.192.12

Re: SPF and greylisting conditioning

2010-09-26 Thread JunkYardMail1
Which makes their domain an easy target for block lists. http://www.spamhaus.org/query/dbl?domain=takeprettypictures.net -- From: "mouss" Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 1:38 PM To: Subject: Re: SPF and greylisting conditioning Le 26/09/2010

Re: Regexp for blocking dynamic hosts?

2010-08-30 Thread JunkYardMail1
.* -- From: "Patrick Lists" Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 2:34 PM To: Subject: Regexp for blocking dynamic hosts? Hi, I got a lot of spam lately from dynamic hosts so gradually I have been adding rules to block them with the help of the rules

Re: smtpd_delay_reject = yes & Reject Logging

2010-08-11 Thread JunkYardMail1
With smtpd_delay_reject = yes Which of the restriction sections was the following logged rejection for? Or put another way, in which of the restriction sections was the rejection option "reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org" that resulted in the logged rejection? Restriction Options: smtpd_clie

Re: smtpd_delay_reject = yes & Reject Logging

2010-08-10 Thread JunkYardMail1
"I think he just wants to know which smtpd restrictions list contains the rule that caused the rejection." Correct. -- From: "Michael Orlitzky" Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 2:02 PM To: Subject: Re: smtpd_delay_reject = yes & Reject Logging O

Re: smtpd_delay_reject = yes & Reject Logging

2010-08-10 Thread JunkYardMail1
Technically correct yet totally useless. You would be perfect Microsoft employee. (lookup the joke about helicopter pilot and Microsoft) -- From: "Ralf Hildebrandt" Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 1:23 PM To: Subject: Re: smtpd_delay_reject = yes

Re: smtpd_delay_reject = yes & Reject Logging

2010-08-10 Thread JunkYardMail1
Yes it does cause a problem. It does not indicate the stage the rejection is associated with (CONNECT, HELO, FROM, RCPT, etc.). -- From: "Noel Jones" Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 1:27 PM To: Subject: Re: smtpd_delay_reject = yes & Reject Loggi

smtpd_delay_reject = yes & Reject Logging

2010-08-10 Thread JunkYardMail1
When using the "smtpd_delay_reject = yes" option, all log messages indicate RCPT stage rejection. e.g. "... NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from ..."; regardless of which type of restriction an option is listed under. For instance a rejection based on the following will indicate RCPT rather than CONNECT

Re: need help with forged To and From

2010-08-08 Thread JunkYardMail1
http://www.openspf.org/ -- From: "donovan jeffrey j" Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 10:48 AM To: "Postfix users" Subject: need help with forged To and From greetings this weekend I have been hit with a ton of forged spam messages. here is a samp

Re: [Postfix-Users] Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-05 Thread JunkYardMail1
That is what I thought. You really don't have an objection or case to back it up so reveal your true nature by attacking with personal criticism rather than sticking to the subject matter and making your case. -- From: "John R. Dennison" Sent:

Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-04 Thread JunkYardMail1
Very aware spammers can create their own domains and and SPF records. They can do essentially the same thing with any anti spam measures. And I have see a number of them do just that, an SPF record of entire IPv4 address space (0.0.0.0/0). But guess what, everyone of them has been in an RHSBL

Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-04 Thread JunkYardMail1
What is your objection? -- From: "John Levine" Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 9:48 PM To: Cc: Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF Anyone opposed to the postfix.org domain publishing an SPF record? Yes. Now, can you go away, please? R's, John, MAAWG s

Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-04 Thread JunkYardMail1
My original post was regarding postfix. But you and others who seemed more interested in taking it off topic to squelch the request for postfix.org to publish an SPF record. I oblige the challenge and then you all start complain about thread being off topic. Well it wouldn't be off topic if

Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-04 Thread JunkYardMail1
US financial services industry group endorses SPF, so most banks, credit unions, brokerages, etc. publish an SPF record. MAAWG: "At the very least, senders should incorporate SPF records for their mailing domains". Austrailan DoD Recommends SPF Google.com, GoogleMail.com, Gmail.com, Comcast.

Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-04 Thread JunkYardMail1
What is stupid is to be so opposed to anti spam tools that have no significant downside. Makes one wonder about true motives. -- From: "Matt Hayes" Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 7:29 PM To: Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF On 07/04/2010 10:20 PM, jun

Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-04 Thread JunkYardMail1
Yahoo has ulterior motives? They wish to push their domain keys. Others probably likewise have ulterior motives. Do you also oppose SPF, and if so what is your motives? -- From: "mouss" Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 7:29 PM To: Subject: Re: Post

Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-04 Thread JunkYardMail1
Some do not accept email from domains whose owner does not publish the servers they authorize to transfer mail for their domain. -- From: "Sahil Tandon" Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 11:53 AM To: Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF On Sat, 2010-07-03

Re: Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-04 Thread JunkYardMail1
Those who wish to make use of it can do so. From: Jeroen Geilman Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 11:46 AM To: postfix-users@postfix.org Subject: Re: Postfix.org SPF On 07/03/2010 08:45 PM, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote: How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org. This would wor

Re: Connection Refused on Port 25

2010-07-03 Thread JunkYardMail1
Oh and here is another thought. Go back to the very first failure occurrence for draxlerinsurance.com and see what the cause of that very first rejection was. -- From: Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 7:42 PM To: "Asai" ; Subject: Re: Connection R

Re: Connection Refused on Port 25

2010-07-03 Thread JunkYardMail1
Have you verified your MTA's are not on a Black/Block list? Maybe draxlerinsurance.com has firewalled you off. I know I would. http://www.mxtoolbox.com/blacklists.aspx [r...@vps1 ~]# telnet 67.227.17.37 25 Trying 67.227.17.37... Connected to 67.227.17.37. Escape character is '^]'. 220 ***

Postfix.org SPF

2010-07-03 Thread JunkYardMail1
How about publishing an SPF record for postfix.org. This would work well: "v=spf1 mx include:cloud9.net ~all" http://openspf.org/ http://old.openspf.org/wizard.html?mydomain=Postfix.org

Re: System Command on Client Restriction Rejection

2010-07-02 Thread JunkYardMail1
Already have a home grown log scrapper dynamically managing (add/remove) firewall rules and love the results. Not only have bad behaving bots disappeared but there seems to be fewer spam attempts for unique clients as well. Leaving log files much less cluttered and much smaller. When I say dis

System Command on Client Restriction Rejection

2010-07-01 Thread JunkYardMail1
Is it possible to execute a system command upon the following smtpd client restriction rejections? smtpd_client_restrictions = reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org, reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname, reject_unknown_client_hostname Would like to automate insertion of client IP address into IP