On Jul 13, 2021, at 2:15 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> On Jul 11, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Claus R. Wickinghoff
>> wrote:
>>> I think this can be achieved with reject_unverified_recipient to query
>>> dovecot via lmtp but I've no practical experience with this. Probably
>>> you've to do som
On Jul 11, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Claus R. Wickinghoff wrote:
I think this can be achieved with reject_unverified_recipient to query
dovecot via lmtp but I've no practical experience with this. Probably
you've to do some googling...
On 12.07.21 10:19, Ron Garret wrote:
That turned out to be the
For the record:
On Jul 11, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Claus R. Wickinghoff wrote:
> I think this can be achieved with reject_unverified_recipient to query
> dovecot via lmtp but I've no practical experience with this. Probably you've
> to do some googling...
That turned out to be the Right Answer. I
On 11.07.21 23:26, Ron Garret wrote:
This has me wondering: if a message is sent to multiple recipients and some
are valid and others are not, what is the Right Thing to do?
The right thing is to refuse all non-existing recipients, which postfix does
by default if it knows what addresses exist.
Thanks, that was very helpful.
This has me wondering: if a message is sent to multiple recipients and some are
valid and others are not, what is the Right Thing to do?
rg
P.S. Just FYI:
> I'm not sure what the problem is with Postfix and sqlite
See
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-i
On 7/11/21 3:46 PM, Ron Garret wrote:
Ah. That may be my problem then. I’m using Dovecot via LMTP for local
delivery. I thought that postfix would receive information about non-existent
users via that protocol, but I guess it doesn’t and ends up just accepting
everything.
So… is dovecot ac
On 2021-07-11 at 15:46:45 UTC-0400 (Sun, 11 Jul 2021 12:46:45 -0700)
Ron Garret
is rumored to have said:
On Jul 11, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
The problem is that a rejected recipient produces a mailer-daemon
reply.
only if you accept mail for such recipient.
Ah.
Ron Garret:
[ Charset windows-1252 converted... ]
>
> On Jul 11, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
> wrote:
>
> >
> >> The problem is that a rejected recipient produces a mailer-daemon reply.
> >
> > only if you accept mail for such recipient.
>
> Ah. That may be my problem then. I
Hi,
I thought that postfix would receive information about non-existent users via
that protocol, but I guess it doesn’t and ends up just accepting everything.
These are two different things:
1. postfix gets the e-mail from the internet via smtp and puts in his
queue. From this point on post
On Jul 11, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
>> The problem is that a rejected recipient produces a mailer-daemon reply.
>
> only if you accept mail for such recipient.
Ah. That may be my problem then. I’m using Dovecot via LMTP for local
delivery. I thought that postfix
Ron Garret:
I have recently come under a backscatter spam attack from one
specific domain. This domain has blacklisted my server?s IP
address, and so bounce replies sent to this domain are piling up
in my mail queue and I have to go through periodically and manually
delete them. I don?t want
Hi,
The problem is that a rejected recipient produces a mailer-daemon reply.
You need to get rid of them.
My approach is to reject them in smtp dialogue. I generate a list of
valid recipient addresses by script automatically and use this (hashed)
list in smtpd_recipient_restrictions:
t 10:12 AM, Wietse Venema
wrote:
Ron Garret:
[ Charset windows-1252 converted... ]
On Jul 11, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Wietse Venema
wrote:
Ron Garret:
I have recently come under a backscatter spam attack from one
specific domain. This domain has blacklisted my server?s IP
address, and so bounce re
Yes, I looked at that, but AFAICT that is all about blocking INBOUND
backscatter spam, not stopping outbound messages.
On Jul 11, 2021, at 10:15 AM, Kevin N. wrote:
> This might help: http://www.postfix.org/BACKSCATTER_README.html
>
> Cheers,
>
> K.
>
>
>>
On Jul 11, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ron Garret:
> [ Charset windows-1252 converted... ]
>>
>> On Jul 11, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>
>>> Ron Garret:
>>>> I have recently come under a backscatter spam attack fr
This might help: http://www.postfix.org/BACKSCATTER_README.html
Cheers,
K.
On Jul 11, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ron Garret:
I have recently come under a backscatter spam attack from one
specific domain. This domain has blacklisted my server?s IP
address, and so bounce
Ron Garret:
[ Charset windows-1252 converted... ]
>
> On Jul 11, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Ron Garret:
> >> I have recently come under a backscatter spam attack from one
> >> specific domain. This domain has blacklisted my server?s IP
> &g
On Jul 11, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ron Garret:
>> I have recently come under a backscatter spam attack from one
>> specific domain. This domain has blacklisted my server?s IP
>> address, and so bounce replies sent to this domain are piling up
>> in
Ron Garret:
> I have recently come under a backscatter spam attack from one
> specific domain. This domain has blacklisted my server?s IP
> address, and so bounce replies sent to this domain are piling up
> in my mail queue and I have to go through periodically and manually
> dele
I have recently come under a backscatter spam attack from one specific domain.
This domain has blacklisted my server’s IP address, and so bounce replies sent
to this domain are piling up in my mail queue and I have to go through
periodically and manually delete them. I don’t want to disable
when we implemented it, are there any
> working configurations that successfully reject/drop backscatter
> spam? Shown below is our postconf -n.
>
>
> [root@mail ~]# uname -a
> Linux [REMOVED] 2.6.32-431.23.3.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jul 31
> 17:20:51 UTC 2014 x86_64
rate limiting
mail forwarded from our server.
Other than cryptic header checks and the guide at
http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=usage which appears to have blocked
legitimate mail when we implemented it, are there any working
configurations that successfully reject/drop backscatter spam
On Behalf Of Simon
>
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by
> mail-in2.{ourdomain}.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 038A71278B for
> ; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:21:11 +1300 (NZDT)
> X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail-in2.{ourdomain}.net
> Received: from mail-in2.{ourdomain}.net ([127.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:56 AM, mouss wrote:
> 1) nothing in your sample shows that you use postfix.
> if using postfix, why is Return-Path in the middle of headers?
>
> 2) given the return-path you show, this is not backscatter. maybe you
> meant envelope sender forgery?
>
> 3) 93.85.177.92 i
reylisting and postfix-policyd-spf-python. All updates
> applied.
>
> But we are still getting hammered by backscatter spam (like the below)
> and are hoping to get the lists input with where to head in terms of
> getting this sorted... it seems like everything we look at just does
reylisting and postfix-policyd-spf-python. All updates
> applied.
>
> But we are still getting hammered by backscatter spam (like the below)
> and are hoping to get the lists input with where to head in terms of
> getting this sorted... it seems like everything we look at just does
t we are still getting hammered by backscatter spam (like the below)
and are hoping to get the lists input with where to head in terms of
getting this sorted... it seems like everything we look at just does
not quite suit our setup.
Many thanks in advance
Simon
Received: from psmtp
On Tuesday 13 April 2010 16:32:03 motty.cruz wrote:
> Hello, I seemed to be losing the fight against backscatter email, one of
> our users is getting tons of backscatter spam a day. I'm using postfix
> Mail_version 2.7.0 + amavisd (Spamassassin) on FreeBSD machine. Please
> help!
Hello, I seemed to be losing the fight against backscatter email, one of our
users is getting tons of backscatter spam a day. I'm using postfix
Mail_version 2.7.0 + amavisd (Spamassassin) on FreeBSD machine. Please help!
# cat header_checks
/^Content-Type: multipart\/report; report
Noel Jones escribió:
Miguel Da Silva - Centro de Matemática wrote:
Dear users, I'm quite suprised seeing this kind of messages at the
mail server:
Aug 29 17:19:31 mordred postfix/smtpd[23160]: connect from
fder1.fder.edu.uy[164.73.178.2]
Aug 29 17:19:32 mordred postfix/smtpd[23160]: setting
Miguel Da Silva - Centro de Matemática wrote:
Dear users, I'm quite suprised seeing this kind of messages at the mail
server:
Aug 29 17:19:31 mordred postfix/smtpd[23160]: connect from
fder1.fder.edu.uy[164.73.178.2]
Aug 29 17:19:32 mordred postfix/smtpd[23160]: setting up TLS connection
fr
Dear users, I'm quite suprised seeing this kind of messages at the mail
server:
Aug 29 17:19:31 mordred postfix/smtpd[23160]: connect from
fder1.fder.edu.uy[164.73.178.2]
Aug 29 17:19:32 mordred postfix/smtpd[23160]: setting up TLS connection
from fder1.fder.edu.uy[164.73.178.2]
Aug 29 17:
32 matches
Mail list logo
