nsistent with what Wietse said! Now it feels like it would
make sense for isync to handle multiple blanks, though it is maybe overkill to
change their parsing everywhere. Maybe a compromise is to support multiple
blanks in this very place (now that we know that postfix tends to write two
hat
having two white spaces here is illegal), so that it would make an incentive to
update. This is the reason why I am trying to really understand the specs above,
I am not actively trying to be annoying :-).
Best Regards,
Jonas
___
Postfix-users mailing lis
is valid according to the specs or not. If it
is valid, I will gladly send a patch to isync. If not, then I must say I don't
know what codebase is generating this date (could it be Postfix?) and would be
happy to get advice.
Best Regards,
Jonas V
ated as foreign addresses
(and forwarded to the relay).
Do you have an idea how to configure submx.example.org in a way to treat
'example.org' as a non-local domain except for the one particular
address 'b...@example.org'?
Kind regards
jonas
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
FWIW, in the original advisory at [1], section 4, there is a snippet
of C you can use to test whether you are vulnerable. If you are, you
should probably upgrade asap. The fact that no exploit for a specific
program has been found is no final proof t
On 05.08.2014 20:08, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 8/5/2014 12:53 PM, M. Rodrigo Monteiro wrote:
>> 2014-08-05 14:47 GMT-03:00 Noel Jones :
>>> On 8/5/2014 12:23 PM, M. Rodrigo Monteiro wrote:
Hi!
This postfix act as a Relay.
From all servers, but one, the message size is 20MB. For the
On 22.07.2014 08:04, Chris wrote:
> Hello,
>
> to test my servers (that is:
> I've got one domain at namecheap. Using their SMTP to send mails but my
> own VPS for the apache hosting and I run an own Postfix SMTP on my
> domain3.de as well) I wanted to send one email from domain2.com to
> domain3.
On 22.07.2014 08:17, Nicolás wrote:
> Having this configuration, anyone using my mail server as the relayhost
> is able to send mails to the domains that I handle (not outside), even
> without SASL. I guess that behavior is determined by
> 'defer_unauth_destination', however, my aim is to specifica
On 24.05.2014 14:42, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
>
> Zitat von lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
>
>> Not sure if someone already noticed (in German):
>>
>> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Bund-sichert-ueberraschend-Mailtransport-per-DANE-ab-2196565.html
>>
>>
>> Looks like the german government is at l
er (although an active attacker
will be able to spoof the connection). Disabling ADH would make that
connection drop back to plaintext, which is worse because it cannot even
protect against a passive eavesdropper.
As said elsewhere, without DANE+DNSSEC, this is the best we can get
right now.
regards,
Jonas
On 09.05.2014 18:44, Andreas Schulze wrote:
> Viktor Dukhovni:
>> It may be simpler to upgrade your system.
> yes, upgrade would be best but sometimes,
> older crypto is not as painfull as it should be
Although older crypto saves you from heartbleeds. I think there are some
good reasons (not that
er checking on XMPP hosts, including certificate, cipher
and DNSSEC checks (example report[1]).
regards,
Jonas
[1]: https://xmpp.net/result.php?domain=sotecware.net&type=client
?
best regards,
Jonas
cy and or after queue filtering are good
solutions,
but both seem rather complex for a relatively easy problem.
I'm curious to read your suggestions and comments :)
Regards,
jonas
On 04/04/2011 04:29 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
The example is here:
http://www.postfix.org/RESTRICTION_CLASS_README.html#internal
You can use as many or as few addresses as required.
Thanks Noel, that's exactly what I searched for!
this?
Thanks,
Jonas
I've been thinking for a while about a setup I would like to achieve,
and I still have some questions about it.
What I'm trying to build is basically a Postfix server which checks
the received mail against a MySQL database and checks what to do next
with the email.
The MySQL database would contain
When a bounce message from <> is going to an address that is in
virtual_alias_maps the sender gets rewritten to , or at
least that is what seems to happen. Some mail servers reject
MAILER-DAEMON as a sender due to the lack of domain (att.net,
comcast.net). How can I control this? What is the pr
Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 10:02:37AM -0800, David Jonas wrote:
>
>
>>> What version of Postfix are you using?
>>>
>> 2.3.8 and 2.4.6-- yea, we're a little behind. Perhaps I'll bring us up
>> to 2.5 today.
>>
Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 05:55:28PM -0800, David Jonas wrote:
>
>
>> We provide forwarding to external accounts (e.g. gmail.com) and it
>> appears that in some cases postfix is invalidating the DKIM signatures.
>> The most prominent and obvi
We provide forwarding to external accounts (e.g. gmail.com) and it
appears that in some cases postfix is invalidating the DKIM signatures.
The most prominent and obvious case is eBay and PayPal where gmail is
now bouncing/dropping messages where the signature doesn't match.
I caused ebay to send a
21 matches
Mail list logo
