Greetings, Wietse Venema!
> Wietse Venema:
>> Andrey Repin:
>> > Greetings, All!
>> >
>> > > Greetings, Viktor Dukhovni!
>> >
>> > >>> Makes sense, thank you.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> So, next question is, do you want it to be mentioned in "Enabling
>> > >>> Postfix
>> > >>> SMTPUTF8 support" [2] or
Wietse Venema:
> Andrey Repin:
> > Greetings, All!
> >
> > > Greetings, Viktor Dukhovni!
> >
> > >>> Makes sense, thank you.
> > >>>
> > >>> So, next question is, do you want it to be mentioned in "Enabling
> > >>> Postfix
> > >>> SMTPUTF8 support" [2] or separately?
> > >>>
> > >>> [2] http:/
Andrey Repin:
> Greetings, All!
>
> > Greetings, Viktor Dukhovni!
>
> >>> Makes sense, thank you.
> >>>
> >>> So, next question is, do you want it to be mentioned in "Enabling Postfix
> >>> SMTPUTF8 support" [2] or separately?
> >>>
> >>> [2] http://www.postfix.org/SMTPUTF8_README.html#enabling
Greetings, All!
> Greetings, Viktor Dukhovni!
>>> Makes sense, thank you.
>>>
>>> So, next question is, do you want it to be mentioned in "Enabling Postfix
>>> SMTPUTF8 support" [2] or separately?
>>>
>>> [2] http://www.postfix.org/SMTPUTF8_README.html#enabling
>> My guess would be under:
>>
Greetings, Viktor Dukhovni!
>> Makes sense, thank you.
>>
>> So, next question is, do you want it to be mentioned in "Enabling Postfix
>> SMTPUTF8 support" [2] or separately?
>>
>> [2] http://www.postfix.org/SMTPUTF8_README.html#enabling
> My guess would be under:
>http://www.postfix.org/S
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 03:48:45AM +0300, Andrey Repin wrote:
> Makes sense, thank you.
>
> So, next question is, do you want it to be mentioned in "Enabling Postfix
> SMTPUTF8 support" [2] or separately?
>
> [2] http://www.postfix.org/SMTPUTF8_README.html#enabling
My guess would be under:
Greetings, Wietse Venema!
> Viktor Dukhovni:
>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 12:45:37AM +0300, Andrey Repin wrote:
>>
>> > > Indeed I forgot that this does not enforce an ASCII character-set:
>> > >
>> > > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#strict_rfc821_envelopes
>> > >
>> > > However, right
Viktor Dukhovni:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 12:45:37AM +0300, Andrey Repin wrote:
>
> > > Indeed I forgot that this does not enforce an ASCII character-set:
> > >
> > > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#strict_rfc821_envelopes
> > >
> > > However, right below that is:
> > >
> > > http:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 12:45:37AM +0300, Andrey Repin wrote:
> > Indeed I forgot that this does not enforce an ASCII character-set:
> >
> > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#strict_rfc821_envelopes
> >
> > However, right below that is:
> >
> > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#s
Greetings, Viktor Dukhovni!
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:56:56PM -0700, Zach Callear wrote:
>> Viktor Dukhovni:
>> > Have you tried:
>> > strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes
>>
>> I just tested it. With "strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes", and with a
>> blank "smtpd_helo_restrictions" setting, email
> On Feb 12, 2019, at 9:38 AM, Andrey Repin wrote:
>
> If you point in the direction of a repository and hint on what you want to see
> in it, I can try my hand.
The postfix source code is available from any of the various mirrors
listed at: http://www.postfix.org/download.html
I have a github
Greetings, Viktor Dukhovni!
>>
>>> However, right below that is:
>>> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#strict_smtputf8
>>>
>>> which will do the job.
>>
>> Thank you, Victor. That setting indeed allows me to reject Unicode
>> characters (and not just BOMs) in a MAIL FROM command, when
> On Feb 11, 2019, at 6:08 PM, Zach Callear wrote:
>
>> However, right below that is:
>> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#strict_smtputf8
>>
>> which will do the job.
>
> Thank you, Victor. That setting indeed allows me to reject Unicode
> characters (and not just BOMs) in a MAIL FR
Viktor Dukhovni:
However, right below that is:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#strict_smtputf8
which will do the job.
Thank you, Victor. That setting indeed allows me to reject Unicode
characters (and not just BOMs) in a MAIL FROM command, when SMTPUTF8
isn't specified, as I ini
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:56:56PM -0700, Zach Callear wrote:
> Viktor Dukhovni:
> > Have you tried:
> > strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes
>
> I just tested it. With "strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes", and with a
> blank "smtpd_helo_restrictions" setting, email sent with the example
> SMTP script
Viktor Dukhovni:
Have you tried:
strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes
? There's nothing special about a "UTF-8 BOM" (there's no such thing in
UTF-8 actually UTF-8 has no little-endian form). It is rather likely
that your sender was not using SMTPUTF8, and so the encoding of non-ASCII
envelope
> On Feb 11, 2019, at 2:16 PM, Zach Callear wrote:
>
> it still would be nice to have an easy configuration option to affect that
> behavior,
> as I find it highly unlikely that there's a legitimate use case for it.
Have you tried:
strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes
? There's nothing spec
Wietse Venema:
What is the difference with final delivery to Dovecot?
There is nothing special about the fact that I'm doing final delivery to
Dovecot, but it is what made me notice the problem. I just personally
consider it invalid for an envelope sender address to contain a UTF BOM,
and I
Zach Callear:
> My server has been receiving a lot of spam lately where the username
> portion of the email address in the MAIL FROM command contains a UTF
> byte-order mark (BOM).
>
> With my configuration until this point:
>
> 1. Postfix does recipient verification with Dovecot LMTP, which do
19 matches
Mail list logo
