> > Further, how does DKIM prove the message wasn't altered? To my knowledge,
> > SPF proves the message came from a qualified server and DKIM proves the FQDN
> > is a match.
>
> DKIM signs a hash of the canonicalized message body and the set of headers
> specified in the signature. Modify the bo
> should be depreciated, is already being deprecated, etc. But while upgrading,
> it would be convenient to continue supporting those devices (mostly scanners
> and printers) that cannot do TLSv1.2,
> Any hints or help appreciated.
> It looks like I'll have to recompile from source.
Are these s
> > Is there any way to know what username was used in these attempts.
> > (An existing one every time or they are choosen from a dictionary?)
> saslauthd is likely logging failure via LOG_AUTH facility, see
> /var/log/auth.log or /var/log/secure.
Bingo! :-)
Names came from dictionary.
Thanks.
My logs are fullfilled with this:
Jan 20 20:05:26 linzer postfix/smtpd[22308]: warning: hostname c942452695-cloudp
ro-214859053.cloudatcost.com does not resolve to address 167.88.40.162: Name or
service not known
Jan 20 20:05:26 linzer postfix/smtpd[22308]: connect from unknown[167.88.40.162]
Jan
> > workaround is to establish SSH port forwarding asynchronously, and that
> > is a fragile setup that I would like to replace by something synchronous
> You need to make smtp(8) talk to a TCP port (or UNIX-domain port),
> an arrange for a little daemon that listens on that port, and that
> invok
> I have a multi-instance setup.
> By doing "ps -ef", as expected, I see a lot of "master" processes.
> Is there a way to see which master is related to which instance at a glance?
Fuser or lsof says which process listens on a specific port.
Pstree or ps shows the parent of it.
(At least on Linux.
> I'd like ask a dumb question: I see there are many things in Postfix which
> named as pipe(8), smtp(5), lmtp(8). So what is number 5 or 8 mean? Version
> number?
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/3586/what-do-the-numbers-in-a-man-page-mean
Gabor
> > mynetworks = 192.168.97.0/28, 127.0.0.0/8, [::1]/128, [fe80::]/64,
> > [fec0::]/64
>
> Just delete [fe80::]/64 and [fec0::]/64.
> No client will use link local and site local address of your server
> therefore listening on these is absolute unnecessary.
^
Eeeer... _filter
> mynetworks = 192.168.97.0/28, 127.0.0.0/8, [::1]/128, [fe80::]/64, [fec0::]/64
Just delete [fe80::]/64 and [fec0::]/64.
No client will use link local and site local address of your server
therefore listening on these is absolute unnecessary.
Gabor
> The exchange servers have some groups of consecutive IPs on their allow list,
> some cover 5 or 6 IPs, others 100.
> Is there a way to provide the same list .i.e.
> 192.168.0.2-12OK
>
> without:
>
> Listing them all individually
> i.e.
> 192.168.0.2 OK
> 192.168.0.3 OK
> Etc...
>
> smtpd_helo_restrictions = permit_mynetworks,
> reject_invalid_helo_hostname,
> reject_unknown_helo_hostname
> Yet, in the logs I still get these reports (sample on one line):
>
> Aug 26 03:37:52 postfix/smtpd[27675]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> spam1.vodafone.gr[213.249.16.2]: 450 4.
11 matches
Mail list logo
