w this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-the-best-anti-spam-and-anti-virus-combos-for-Postfix-tp90210p90369.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 5/7/17 9:58 PM, pbw wrote:
...the simplest lightweight solution (for me) is postscreen, SPF/
DKIM and Spamprobe via dovecot/sieve filters.
Your approach seems applicable to me. I have set up postscreen from
the postfix docs. What is the best documentation for the remainder of
your setup?
T
Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and anti-virus programs do you
all use with Postifx? Any advice on which programs work best?
I will add one more bit. I am one of the postmasters for mail.python.org.
As such, I have nothing to do directly with the Postfix side of the shop. I
maintain
e most of my clients run
> linux desktops and the few that don't use whatever comes with their
> OS system or a commercial antivirus package.
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-the-best-anti-spam-and-anti-virus-combos-for-Postfix-tp90210
On 29/4/17 5:26 am, Linda Pagillo wrote:
Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and anti-virus programs
do you all use with Postifx? Any advice on which programs work best?
I'm not sure about the absolute best spam filtering system but the
simplest lightweight solution (for me) is postscr
Am 28.04.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Linda Pagillo:
> Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and anti-virus programs do
> you all use with Postifx? Any advice on which programs work best?
mostly used
amavis-new (framework, milter), spamassassin ( milter ), clamav ( milter )
with sanesecurity signa
Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and anti-virus programs do you
all use with Postifx? Any advice on which programs work best?
Ron Winograd a écrit :
> I'm in the same boat. One suggestion (if you are not already doing so)
> is to take advantage of the fact that you can easily tell Postfix to
> send email for only the problem domains through your ISP and
> direct-deliver all the rest. Whenever I encounter a problem with a
Stroller wrote:
On 22 Oct 2008, at 12:56, Richard Foley wrote:
...
spam_ip_regex file:
/[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
connecting from a Dynamic IP address.
This looks fairly useful. Does anyone else have any experience with
this
approach, who might be
Zitat von Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Roman Medina-Heigl Hernandez escreveu:
- I wouldn't set up a global greylist filter, because all my receiving mail
is going to be delayed (I guess my users don't like this ;-))
after years deploying mail servers with greylistin
On 23 Oct 2008, at 00:49, MacShane, Tracy wrote:
On 22 Oct 2008, at 12:56, Richard Foley wrote:
...
spam_ip_regex file:
/[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear
to be
This looks fairly useful. Does anyone else have any experience with
this approach, who might be
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stroller
> Sent: Thursday, 23 October 2008 12:53 AM
> To: Postfix
> Subject: Re: Best anti-spam
>
>
> On 22 Oct 2008, at 12:56, Richard Foley wrote:
> >> ...
>
Robert Felber a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:45:45PM +0200, mouss wrote:
>> Brian Evans - Postfix List a écrit :
>>> I use and recommend policyd-weight looking at it as "if it isn't broke,
>>> don't fix it."
>> note however that some people use policyd-weight with "bad
>> configuration". so
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:45:45PM +0200, mouss wrote:
> Brian Evans - Postfix List a écrit :
> >
> > I use and recommend policyd-weight looking at it as "if it isn't broke,
> > don't fix it."
>
> note however that some people use policyd-weight with "bad
> configuration". some (or is it all?) de
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 02:28:11PM -0400, Dan Horne wrote:
> > - I wouldn't set up a global greylist filter, because all my receiving
> mail
> > is going to be delayed (I guess my users don't like this ;-))
> ...
> > - I wouldn't set up a global REJECT based on RBL...
> > - *BUT* I would combine an
> - I wouldn't set up a global greylist filter, because all my receiving
mail
> is going to be delayed (I guess my users don't like this ;-))
...
> - I wouldn't set up a global REJECT based on RBL...
> - *BUT* I would combine any of the former. For instance: "pass all
mail
> appearing to come from
Larry Stone a écrit :
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, mouss wrote:
>
> /[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear
> to be
> connecting from a Dynamic IP address.
>
>> What I am working on now is this:
>>
>> - if name (PTR or helo) looks dynamic, then do:
>
> One problem
Henrik K a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 02:05:02PM -0300, Reinaldo de Carvalho wrote:
>>> Sorry but developing stupid regexpes anywhere is not appropriate, especially
>>> when it can be done right. But hey, you are free to block /.*/ if you want,
>>> who am I to judge. It certainly blocks spam
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 02:05:02PM -0300, Reinaldo de Carvalho wrote:
> >
> > Sorry but developing stupid regexpes anywhere is not appropriate, especially
> > when it can be done right. But hey, you are free to block /.*/ if you want,
> > who am I to judge. It certainly blocks spam!
> >
> >
>
> Re
>
> Sorry but developing stupid regexpes anywhere is not appropriate, especially
> when it can be done right. But hey, you are free to block /.*/ if you want,
> who am I to judge. It certainly blocks spam!
>
>
Regexp to reject "generic hostname" like dialup, dsl, cable, is not stupid.
--
Reinald
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, mouss wrote:
/[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
connecting from a Dynamic IP address.
What I am working on now is this:
- if name (PTR or helo) looks dynamic, then do:
One problem is DSL does not mean dynamic. Many DSL providers pro
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:16:13PM -0400, Terry Carmen wrote:
> Henrik K wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:34:28PM +, Duane Hill wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Terry Carmen wrote:
>>>
>>>
/[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear
to be connectin
Jim Balo wrote:
Depends on the source/nature of your spam. It's good for reducing the
load on SpamAssassin et. al. and it blocks lots of virus-sent spam.
Greylisting alone lets some through at work but I just rebuilt my *very*
old (circa late-90s) server at home and added grey
Henrik K wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:34:28PM +, Duane Hill wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Terry Carmen wrote:
/[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
connecting from a Dynamic IP address. /client.*\..*\..*/i 450
AUTO_CLIENT Email Rejected.
Roman Medina-Heigl Hernandez escreveu:
- I wouldn't set up a global greylist filter, because all my receiving mail
is going to be delayed (I guess my users don't like this ;-))
after years deploying mail servers with greylisting enabled, i think
you should definitely, at least, try to
Hello,
I don't know the details of what you're trying to do, but it seems aligned
with the concept I'd like to implement, so perhaps we could colaborate and
help each other.
My main premise is to reduce the number of false negatives, sacrifying (it
necessary) the number of false positives (i.e. I
Henrik K a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:47:53PM +0200, Matthias Haegele wrote:
>> I think this is rather a bad idea. I would prefer to treat them on their
>> behaviour
>> (use helo checks, check for reverse dns ..., you should find several
>> examples in this thread, from mouss ...) .
>> Wh
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:47:53PM +0200, Matthias Haegele wrote:
>
> I think this is rather a bad idea. I would prefer to treat them on their
> behaviour
> (use helo checks, check for reverse dns ..., you should find several
> examples in this thread, from mouss ...) .
> What would prevent a spam
Stroller a écrit :
>
> On 22 Oct 2008, at 12:56, Richard Foley wrote:
>>> ...
>>> spam_ip_regex file:
>>>
>>> /[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
>>> connecting from a Dynamic IP address.
>>> /client.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_CLIENT Email Rejected. You appear t
Matthias Haegele schrieb:
(...)
BTW, has anyone a regexp ready to accept all names that might be real
smtp-out servers?
(such as mail|smtp|mx|email and so on)
I think it can be useful for example to whitelist them before greylisting.
I think this is rather a bad idea. I would prefer to trea
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Matthias Haegele
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Diego Liziero schrieb:
>>
>> BTW, has anyone a regexp ready to accept all names that might be real
>> smtp-out servers?
>>
>> (such as mail|smtp|mx|email and so on)
>>
>> I think it can be useful for example to whitelist
On 22 Oct 2008, at 12:56, Richard Foley wrote:
...
spam_ip_regex file:
/[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear
to be
connecting from a Dynamic IP address.
/client.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_CLIENT Email Rejected. You
appear to
be connecting from a Dynamic IP addr
Diego Liziero schrieb:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Henrik K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Terry Carmen wrote:
>>
>>> /[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
>>> connecting from a Dynamic IP address. /client.*\..*\..*/i 450
>>> AUTO_C
7;s quite tolerable, and I
>>> haven't seen
>>> a false-positive in at least two years.
>>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Do you have any recommendation on how-tos on doing this with
>> Postfix (I know policy-weight is no longer developed, so I
>> rat
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:24:07PM +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Henrik K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Terry Carmen wrote:
> >
> >> /[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
> >> connecting from a Dynamic IP addre
t; a false-positive in at least two years.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> Do you have any recommendation on how-tos on doing this with
> Postfix (I know policy-weight is no longer developed, so I
> rather not use it)?
>
The "best" anti-spam is a matter of opinion.
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Henrik K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Terry Carmen wrote:
>
>> /[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
>> connecting from a Dynamic IP address. /client.*\..*\..*/i 450
>> AUTO_CLIENT Email Rejected. You appe
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Jorey Bump wrote:
Richard Foley wrote, at 10/22/2008 07:56 AM:
On Wednesday 22 October 2008 01:27:51 Terry Carmen wrote:
check_client_access=regexp:/etc/postfix/spam_ip_regex
spam_ip_regex file:
/[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
c
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:34:28PM +, Duane Hill wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Terry Carmen wrote:
>
>> /[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
>> connecting from a Dynamic IP address. /client.*\..*\..*/i 450
>> AUTO_CLIENT Email Rejected. You appear to
Richard Foley wrote, at 10/22/2008 07:56 AM:
> On Wednesday 22 October 2008 01:27:51 Terry Carmen wrote:
>>
>> check_client_access=regexp:/etc/postfix/spam_ip_regex
>>
>> spam_ip_regex file:
>>
>> /[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
>> connecting from a Dynamic
On Wednesday 22 October 2008 01:27:51 Terry Carmen wrote:
>
> Although it's frowned on by some, I've had much better success using a
> combination of RBLs and RDNS pattern matching to reject spam. Since a
> huge proportion of spam comes from zombie networks that are identified
> by DHCP address
mouss schrieb:
Jim Balo a écrit :
Hi,
I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
I am about to install a new mail server and I wonder if there is
so
Jim Balo a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
> I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
> spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
>
> I am about to install a new mail server and I wonder if there is
> somet
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:59:07AM +, Duane Hill wrote:
>
> P.s. Even though policyd-weight may be old, I've heard good things about
> it. We have a customer that uses it and swears by it.
It's fine, but doesn't have much that postfwd can't do. Postfwd has active
development and somewhat mor
> > default_destination_concurrency_limit = 100
>
> This default is normally set to 20. Some servers may frown
> on you
> attempting to make 100 connections to their server.
>
> > relay_domains =
> > $mydestination
> > smtpd_recipient_limit = 5000
> > smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynet
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Jim Balo wrote:
From: Jim Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I can highly recommend gray-listing. It's all I use on
two Postfix servers, and SPAM is reduced by 98%. A few
get through, but it's quite tolerable, and I
haven't seen
a false-positive in at least two years.
Hi,
Do
> From: Jim Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I can highly recommend gray-listing. It's all I use on
> two Postfix servers, and SPAM is reduced by 98%. A few
> get through, but it's quite tolerable, and I
> haven't seen
> a false-positive in at least two years.
Hi,
Do you have any recommendation o
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Noel Jones wrote:
Duane Hill wrote:
"practically none" would depend upon your amount of traffic. Our filter
servers get over seven million connections every 24 hours. Sane Security
does a fair job here at pushing the SpamAssassin score above the default
threshold. I wou
Thanks to all for the input so far. I realize that a big part of my
spam problem is the fact that I do not know this area very well, so
have not done a whole lot to tweak the config. I really wish I had the
time to study this more in depth.
Anyhow, I added "smtpd_client_restrictions" to main.cf
Duane Hill wrote:
"practically none" would depend upon your amount of traffic. Our filter
servers get over seven million connections every 24 hours. Sane Security
does a fair job here at pushing the SpamAssassin score above the default
threshold. I would not suggest using the Sane Security up
The smarter greylisting engines will make an attempt to identify if the
mail is within the same /24 as a previously greylisted IP within the
specified time period to overcome this issue.
While obviously its not guaranteed to get around this issue, we are
greylisting for approximately 3000 doma
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Jim Balo wrote:
>You should post the results of 'postconf -n'. Perhaps you are missing
>some
>smtpd_*_restrictions items that could reduce the load.
broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
command_directory = /usr/sbin
config_directory = /etc/postfix
content_filter = amavisfeed:[1
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Terry Carmen wrote:
/[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
connecting from a Dynamic IP address. /client.*\..*\..*/i 450
AUTO_CLIENT Email Rejected. You appear to be connecting from a Dynamic IP
address.
/cable.*\..*\..*/i 450 A
>
> Terry
>
> ---
>
>
> smtpd_client_restrictions=reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname . . .
>
> check_client_access=regexp:/etc/postfix/spam_ip_regex
>
> spam_ip_regex file:
>
> /[ax]dsl.*\..*\..*/i 450 AUTO_XDSL Email Rejected. You appear to be
> connecting from a Dy
J.P. Trosclair wrote:
> ...
>> Could someone recommend a really good open source or affordable
>> commercial anti-spam solution?
>> ...
>>
> I haven't done gray listing personally, but I've seen good remarks
made aobut it here on the list and in other places.
Depends on the source/nature of y
>You should post the results of 'postconf -n'. Perhaps you are missing
>some
>smtpd_*_restrictions items that could reduce the load.
broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
command_directory = /usr/sbin
config_directory = /etc/postfix
content_filter = amavisfeed:[127.0.0.1]:10024
daemon_directory = /usr
J.P. Trosclair wrote:
Tuesday, October 21, 2008, 5:29:59 PM, Jim Balo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Hi,
I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, James Brown wrote:
On 22/10/2008, at 9:29 AM, Jim Balo wrote:
Hi,
I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
I am about to
On 22/10/2008, at 9:29 AM, Jim Balo wrote:
Hi,
I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
I am about to install a new mail server and I wonder if there
Jim Balo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
> I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
> spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
>
> I am about to install a new mail server and I wonder if there is
> somethin
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Jim Balo wrote:
Hi,
I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
I am about to install a new mail server and I wonder if there is
so
J.P. Trosclair wrote:
...
Could someone recommend a really good open source or affordable
commercial anti-spam solution?
...
I haven't done gray listing personally, but I've seen good remarks made aobut
it here on the list and in other places.
Depends on the source/nature of your spam.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008, 5:29:59 PM, Jim Balo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
> I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
> spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
>
> I am about to
Hi,
I am currently using Postfix w/ Amavis-new, Pyzor, DCC and Clam.
I have trained the Bayesian Classifier with over 2,000 ham and 2,000
spam, but I am still getting quite a bit of spam.
I am about to install a new mail server and I wonder if there is
something better than SpamAssassin t
64 matches
Mail list logo
