Re: Fwd: Re: TLS certificate

On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 12:15:26 -0500, Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 07:13:17PM +0200, Tolga wrote: > >> > Who can't use the certificate? >> >> I, when I try with Thunderbird from another location. > > Well, it is Thunderbird that needs to extend its list of trusted > CAs not Po

relay through smtp and smtps

 Hi Sorry for my english. I have a mailserver with postfix, i am using as relay an smtp with authentication so i have installed SASL. All working fine but now for an account i have necessity that postfix send mails through an smtps relay. How can i do this?Some users use smtp with authentication a

DNS lookups not working?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 All, I see this a lot in my mail.log (unknown): Feb 10 20:38:28 server postfix/smtpd[21977]: connect from unknown[72.4.168.106] Feb 10 09:38:30 server postfix/smtpd[21977]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[72.4.168.106]: 554 5.7.1 Service unavailab

Re: Delaying some email addresses

Victor Duchovni escreveu: > On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 02:44:09PM +, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote: > > >> Good morning, >> >> I'm using spamassassin thru amavisd. I also have a bunch of spamtraps >> (addresses that were never used by persons, but that receive spam >> regularly) feeding automatically

Re: DNS lookups not working?

On 2/10/2009, David Cottle (webmas...@aus-city.com) wrote: > Feb 10 09:38:30 server postfix/smtpd[21977]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT > from unknown[72.4.168.106]: 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Are you usin the free zen service? If so, are you exceeding the limits they place on free usage? -- Best r

Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting

mouss escreveu: > João Miguel Neves a écrit : > >> Charles Marcus escreveu: >> >>> On 2/8/2009, João Miguel Neves (joao.ne...@intraneia.com) wrote: >>> >>> I recently enabled reject_unverified_sender in my postfix configuration, but it seems like it fails when the server

Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting

Juergen P. Meier escreveu: > SAV is a nice idea if run against a limited set of trusted domains (who's > postmasters expclitly allow you to perform these Lookups), but it's not > such a good idea in general. > If everyone would use SAV, the ammount of SMTP traffic in the Internet > would *double*.

Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting

On 2/10/2009, João Miguel Neves (joao.ne...@intraneia.com) wrote: > Right now, I'm preparing my top 10 domains used in spam and enabling SAV > for those. Do you have their PERMISSION? If not, then DON'T... otherwise you risk getting BLACKLISTED. I know that *I* will blackilist you for doing this,

Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting

Charles Marcus escreveu: > On 2/10/2009, João Miguel Neves (joao.ne...@intraneia.com) wrote: > >> Right now, I'm preparing my top 10 domains used in spam and enabling SAV >> for those. >> > > Do you have their PERMISSION? If not, then DON'T... otherwise you risk > getting BLACKLISTED. I kno

How to allow mails from some other servers to pass: reject_sender_login_mismatch

Hi, i'm trying to slow down and block backscater mails and i try to use: reject_sender_login_mismatch and smtpd_sender_login_maps. I have some questions about how to pass this restriction for some cases. The situation is this: We have some other servers where we have installed other webapplicati

Re: DNS lookups not working?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Charles Marcus wrote: > On 2/10/2009, David Cottle (webmas...@aus-city.com) wrote: >> Feb 10 09:38:30 server postfix/smtpd[21977]: NOQUEUE: reject: >> RCPT from unknown[72.4.168.106]: 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; > > Are you usin the free zen service

Re: DNS lookups not working?

David Cottle: [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > All, > > I see this a lot in my mail.log (unknown): > > Feb 10 20:38:28 server postfix/smtpd[21977]: connect from > unknown[72.4.168.106] > Feb 10 09:38:30 server postfix/smtpd[2

Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting

Juergen P. Meier: > If everyone would use SAV, the ammount of SMTP traffic in the Internet > would *double*. I bet most heavy duty mailssystems don't scale double. Go ahead and make my day. What is the basis for this claim? Wietse

Re: Getting localhost put in my From field

Xn Nooby: > I have been trying to figure out how to get Postfix to not append > "localhost" in to the From: field. I am sending email mostly between > two local users, using RHEL5/Squirrelmail/Postfix/Dovecot. > > When I send an email from > > user_...@schoolretail.local > > to > > user_...

Massive Double Bounce problems

Hello, I have two postfix systems which generate a lot of double bounces. I was able to extract such an e-mail using wireshark: 220 erld671x.erlf.siemens.de ESMTP Postfix EHLO erld604x.erlf.siemens.de 250-erld671x.erlf.siemens.de 250-PIPELINING 250-SIZE 104857600 250-VRFY 250-ETRN 250 8BITMIME MAI

Create additional sub-folders postfix/courier

Hi all I have a mail server which is courier, postfix, amavisd, using Postgres db and virtual mailboxes which I administer through postfixadmin. I want to be able to add a set of default folders to all mailboxes created such as Possible Spam and some others. I have investigated shared folders bu

Re: DNS lookups not working?

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > David Cottle: > [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> All, >> >> I see this a lot in my mail.log (unknown): >> >> Feb 10 20:38:28 server postfix/smtpd[21977]: connect from

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Thomas Glanzmann: > Out: 220 erld671x.erlf.siemens.de ESMTP Postfix > In: EHLO erld603x.erlf.siemens.de > Out: 250-erld671x.erlf.siemens.de > Out: 250-PIPELINING > Out: 250-SIZE 104857600 > Out: 250-VRFY > Out: 250-ETRN > Out: 250 8BITMIME > In: MAIL FROM: SIZE=1191 > Out: 452 Insuffici

Re: DNS lookups not working?

On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 21:50:26 +0800 jan gestre wrote: [snip] > I have this same problem that I was not able to solve for almost a > week now. I posted too on various mailing lists including this (mail > from gmail and yahoo are blocked), some suggested to install a caching > nameserver but obvio

Re: DNS lookups not working?

jan gestre: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > David Cottle: > > [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> All, > >> > >> I see this a lot in my mail.log (unknown): > >> > >> Feb 10 20:38:28 server p

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Hello Wietse, * Wietse Venema [090210 14:55]: > Thomas Glanzmann: > > Out: 220 erld671x.erlf.siemens.de ESMTP Postfix > > In: EHLO erld603x.erlf.siemens.de > > Out: 250-erld671x.erlf.siemens.de > > Out: 250-PIPELINING > > Out: 250-SIZE 104857600 > > Out: 250-VRFY > > Out: 250-ETRN > > Ou

Re: Getting localhost put in my From field

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > Xn Nooby: >> I have been trying to figure out how to get Postfix to not append >> "localhost" in to the From: field. I am sending email mostly between >> two local users, using RHEL5/Squirrelmail/Postfix/Dovecot. >> >> When I send an email fr

Re: DNS lookups not working?

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 09:50:26PM +0800, jan gestre wrote: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > David Cottle: > > [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> All, > >> > >> I see this a lot in my mail.l

Re: DNS lookups not working?

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > jan gestre: >> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: >> > David Cottle: >> > [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> >> All, >> >> >> >> I see this

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Thomas Glanzmann: > I still don't get why postfix sends me a soft bounce to notify me that > I'm running out of diskspace. Have you looked at the LOGFILE? > that softbounce and so on until I'm out of resources. Shouldn't postfix > detect that this is a tempfailure and do exactly nothing and retr

RE: Problems with Postfix / Round-Robin

Hi! I am not able to upload the files, I get a post error because I am exceeding the 4 characters. How can I send you the logs? May I upload them to rapidshare or something like that? Thanks!! From: pablosch...@hotmail.com To: postfix-users@postfix.org Subject: RE: Problems with Postfix /

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Hello Wietse, * Wietse Venema [090210 15:11]: > > I still don't get why postfix sends me a soft bounce to notify me > > that I'm running out of diskspace. > Have you looked at the LOGFILE? Not yet, but now I have and I don't like what I see: Feb 10 01:16:14 erld603x postfix/smtpd[4269]: conne

RE: Problems with Postfix / Round-Robin

Wietse, I am not able to access... It is not a productive environment, there is no private information. I upload it to http://rapidshare.com/files/196381965/postfix.rar.html Thanks!! > Subject: Re: Problems with Postfix / Round-Robin > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 09:25

Re: Problems with Postfix / Round-Robin

Pablo Scheri: > > Hi! I am not able to upload the files, I get a post error because > I am exceeding the 4 characters. > How can I send you the logs? May I upload them to rapidshare or > something like that? You can upload to: ftp://ftp.porcupin.org/tmp/random/ files uploaded there can

Re: Delaying some email addresses

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:29:28AM +, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote: > > Don't "delay", if your "spamtrap" addresses are well chosen, have > > never existed as valid email addresses, and are unlikely to be mistyped > > accidentally by a human sender, you can just "REDIRECT" all mail for > > a spamtr

Re: Delaying some email addresses

Victor Duchovni escreveu: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:29:28AM +, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote: Don't "delay", if your "spamtrap" addresses are well chosen, have never existed as valid email addresses, and are unlikely to be mistyped accidentally by a human sender, you can just "REDIRECT" all m

A cautionary tale

As a hobby, I ran a mail server (Xmail) on on old machine, just for myself and a few friends. It was very old, and the mail server was getting slower and slower, and then the greylister broke. So I got a newer old machine and set it up with Postfix on Ubuntu. Tested it on the internal network. E

how to accept some addresses but relay the rest?

I want to configure postfix so that it accepts mails for: us...@example.com (domain name changed) us...@example.com and delivers them locally to the users user1 and user2, but relays any other *...@example.com to the MX of example.com. I tried putting this into /etc/postfix/virtual : examp

Re: how to accept some addresses but relay the rest?

Andy Spiegl wrote: I want to configure postfix so that it accepts mails for: us...@example.com (domain name changed) us...@example.com and delivers them locally to the users user1 and user2, but relays any other *...@example.com to the MX of example.com. I tried putting this into /etc/post

Re: Problems with Postfix / Round-Robin

Pablo Scheri: > > Wietse, > I am not able to access... > It is not a productive environment, there is no private information. > I upload it to http://rapidshare.com/files/196381965/postfix.rar.html It works fine as long as you use an FTP client. I see no hosts 10.0.0.207 etc. in your maillog fil

Re: Delaying some email addresses

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 04:43:15PM +, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote: >>> What I'm trying is dealing with the spam sent for a single address. My >>> idea is the following: >>> >>> 1) Spammer sends emails to existing users and spamtraps; >>> >>> 2) Normal users email is frozen for 2 to 5 minutes; >>>

No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

Charles Marcus escreveu: Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what it should be used for: http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts OK, I've finished reading and analyzing that text. My conclusion is that there's no reason not to use reject_unverified send

Re: how to accept some addresses but relay the rest?

Andy Spiegl escreveu: I want to configure postfix so that it accepts mails for: us...@example.com (domain name changed) us...@example.com and delivers them locally to the users user1 and user2, but relays any other *...@example.com to the MX of example.com. I tried putting this into /etc/p

Re: Delaying some email addresses

Victor Duchovni escreveu: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 04:43:15PM +, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote: What I'm trying is dealing with the spam sent for a single address. My You still have not understood what REDIRECT does. Please see the access(5) documentation. http://www.postfix.

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:49:05 + Jo__o Miguel Neves wrote: > Charles Marcus escreveu: > > Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what > > it should be used for: > > > > http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts > OK, I've finished reading and analyzing tha

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

João Miguel Neves wrote: The SAV check in postfix is done with the postmaster address by default. Recent postfix (2.5 and newer) use $double_bounce_sender as the default for address_verify_sender. This recipient is always valid, never delivered. http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#addres

Re: Delaying some email addresses

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 06:55:11PM +, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote: > Victor Duchovni escreveu: >> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 04:43:15PM +, Jo?o Miguel Neves wrote: >> >> > What I'm trying is dealing with the spam sent for a single address. My > >> You still have not understood

best way to serve as specific system relay

Hi, I've got a number of remote branches that send mail. for the users using a mail client, it's no problem to use SMTP auth. For the less intelligent FAX machines that send FROM: the local address but TO: somewhere else I think I need postfix to serve as a relay for those machines. I thi

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Thomas Glanzmann: > so what happened. erld671x is out of resources, it send an e-mail to > postmas...@erld671x.erlf.siemens.de but because it is horrible > misconfigured it sends that e-mail over its smart host which delivers it > back, which results in a tempfailure which again triggers an out of

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

João Miguel Neves pisze: Charles Marcus escreveu: Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what it should be used for: http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts OK, I've finished reading and analyzing that text. My conclusion is that there's no reason not to

Re: best way to serve as specific system relay

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:23:45PM -0500, post...@corwyn.net wrote: > machines that send FROM: the local address but TO: somewhere else I think I > need postfix to serve as a relay for those machines. > > I think I can fix it by setting > check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/remotebranches > BEF

Re: best way to serve as specific system relay

Victor Duchovni wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:23:45PM -0500, post...@corwyn.net wrote: machines that send FROM: the local address but TO: somewhere else I think I need postfix to serve as a relay for those machines. I think I can fix it by setting check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/rem

hijacked NXDOMAIN (Re: DNS lookups not working?)

jan gestre a écrit : > [snip] >>> I have this same problem that I was not able to solve for almost a >>> week now. I posted too on various mailing lists including this (mail >>> from gmail and yahoo are blocked), some suggested to install a caching >>> nameserver but obviously in your case it doesn

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

João Miguel Neves a écrit : > Charles Marcus escreveu: >> Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what >> it should be used for: >> >> http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts > OK, I've finished reading and analyzing that text. My conclusion is that > there's n

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

Paweł Leśniak escreveu: João Miguel Neves pisze: Charles Marcus escreveu: Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what it should be used for: http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts OK, I've finished reading and analyzing that text. My conclusion is that

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

Paweł Leśniak a écrit : > [snip] > Well, to be honest, I believe you did. If you will do many checks to the > same server (have on mind large ISPs with many domains) with different > emails, then probably your server will get blacklisted to send email > from postmaster@ (at least). If you want expl

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

mouss escreveu: João Miguel Neves a écrit : Charles Marcus escreveu: Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what it should be used for: http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts OK, I've finished reading and analyzing that text. My conclusio

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

Jo??o Miguel Neves: > Pawe? Le?niak escreveu: > > Jo?o Miguel Neves pisze: > >> Charles Marcus escreveu: > >>> Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what > >>> it should be used for: > >>> > >>> http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts > >> OK, I've finished r

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

mouss pisze: no reason to overreact. I am not seeing SAV abuse (but I am seeing backscatter and spam). And I do under some circumstances. If I have SPF record, then I'm helping the other side to check if mail with sender from my domain is permitted or not. This means that sender already had

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

João Miguel Neves a écrit : > OK, I'll take that into consideration if I re-enable SAV. > if you re-enable SAV, do as much checks as you can. the minimum is zen.spamhaus.org. but you can also use spamcop. it would also be good to do it after greylisting, but this means your GL server need to re

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

Paweł Leśniak a écrit : > [snip] >> let me fork a little: SAV on _header_ addresses is plain dumb: >> >> Dec 15 11:25:33 imlil postmx/smtpd[23878]: NOQUEUE: warn: RCPT from >> chlothar.bnv-bamberg.de[217.146.130.193]: Transaction logged: >> PTR=chlothar.bnv-bamberg.de; from= >> to= proto=ESMTP helo

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

On 2/10/2009 1:49 PM, João Miguel Neves wrote: > Charles Marcus escreveu: >> Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what >> it should be used for: >> >> http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts > OK, I've finished reading and analyzing that text. My conclusion

Re: Redirect all mail from one domain to the same u...@otherdomain?

jeff_homeip a écrit : > [snip] > > that creates some complications...and might be too difficult > a script and a Makefile... or sql as below: > but why not use wildcard virtual aliases? You noted below that they break > recipient > validations. Do you mean that smtp_recipient_restrictions won

Re: How to allow mails from some other servers to pass: reject_sender_login_mismatch

an...@iguanait.com a écrit : > Hi, > > i'm trying to slow down and block backscater mails and i try to use: > reject_sender_login_mismatch and smtpd_sender_login_maps. > > I have some questions about how to pass this restriction for some cases. > The situation is this: > > We have some other ser

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

mouss pisze: João Miguel Neves a écrit : OK, I'll take that into consideration if I re-enable SAV. if you re-enable SAV, do as much checks as you can. the minimum is zen.spamhaus.org. but you can also use spamcop. it would also be good to do it after greylisting, but this means your

Re: Create additional sub-folders postfix/courier

Gabriel Tartaglia a écrit : > Hi all > > I have a mail server which is courier, postfix, amavisd, using Postgres > db and virtual mailboxes which I administer through postfixadmin. > > I want to be able to add a set of default folders to all mailboxes > created such as Possible Spam and some othe

Re: No reason not to use reject_unverified sender (was Re: reject_unverified_sender vs greylisting)

Charles Marcus escreveu: On 2/10/2009 1:49 PM, João Miguel Neves wrote: Charles Marcus escreveu: Here's a link informing why indiscriminate use of SAV is bad, and what it should be used for: http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts OK, I've finished reading and

Whitelist assistance with dnswl.org

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I have my own 'static' whitelisting working in smtpd_client_restrictions I would also like to use the whitelisting in dnswl.org to override blacklisting I don't have much mail traffic, so rather than rsyncing, I want to do this using normal DNS

Re: [Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: postfix, dovecot auth and rip/lip]

At 03:53 PM 3/18/2008, you wrote: Wietse Venema wrote: > There is no reason why this can't be implemented, but I want to > avoid chaos in Postfix. So I don't want to keep adding more and > more ad-hoc parameters to the Postfix-to-SASL library interface. > > This interface is also used by Cyrus SA

Re: Whitelist assistance with dnswl.org

David Cottle wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I have my own 'static' whitelisting working in smtpd_client_restrictions I would also like to use the whitelisting in dnswl.org to override blacklisting I don't have much mail traffic, so rather than rsyncing, I want to do

Re: [Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: postfix, dovecot auth and rip/lip]

Nate: > I noticed somebody wrote a patch for postfix-2.3.8. I'm not a C > programmer myself, so I'm not sure of it's quality or if this code > could be used or committed to the postfix source tree. Found at > http://preview.tinyurl.com/b87z44 You are welcome to apply this patch, but it will n

Re: Whitelist assistance with dnswl.org

Sent from my iPhone On 11/02/2009, at 13:04, Noel Jones wrote: David Cottle wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I have my own 'static' whitelisting working in smtpd_client_restrictions I would also like to use the whitelisting in dnswl.org to override blacklisting I

Connection Refused

Is there a way to notify me (i.e. postmaster) when my smtpd_proxy_filter fails? I see in the logs where a "warning: connect to proxy service 127.0.0.1:10024: Connection refused" occurs. How do I get a message sent to me when this happens? -- Jason Wohlford

Re: [Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: postfix, dovecot auth and rip/lip]

At 07:22 PM 2/10/2009, Nate wrote: At 03:53 PM 3/18/2008, you wrote: Wietse Venema wrote: We're using SMTP AUTH in postfix, querying the dovecot auth socket which works well; however, in our virtual hosted environment it requires that customers login with their full email address. Great in p

Re: Connection Refused

On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Jason Wohlford wrote: > Is there a way to notify me (i.e. postmaster) when my smtpd_proxy_filter > fails? I see in the logs where a "warning: connect to proxy service > 127.0.0.1:10024: Connection refused" occurs. How do I get a message sent > to me when this happens? Try

Re: [Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: postfix, dovecot auth and rip/lip]

At 06:45 PM 2/10/2009, post...@corwyn.net wrote: At 07:22 PM 2/10/2009, Nate wrote: At 03:53 PM 3/18/2008, you wrote: Wietse Venema wrote: We're using SMTP AUTH in postfix, querying the dovecot auth socket which works well; however, in our virtual hosted environment it requires that customers

Re: Create additional sub-folders postfix/courier

At 05:24 PM 2/10/2009, mouss wrote: You can create "dummy" mailboxes that use the folders as their maildir. for example: joe+s...@example.com/some/path/example.com/joe/Maildir/.Spam/ then tell amavisd-new to add the "+spam" extension to mail tagged as spam. This may or may not be easy depend

Re: Redirect all mail from one domain to the same u...@otherdomain?

jeff_homeip a écrit : [snip] that creates some complications...and might be too difficult a script and a Makefile... or sql as below: but why not use wildcard virtual aliases? You noted below that they break recipient validations. Do you mean that smtp_recipient_restrictions won't wor

Re: Create additional sub-folders postfix/courier

At 11:04 PM 2/10/2009, post...@corwyn.net wrote: At 05:24 PM 2/10/2009, mouss wrote: While I can readily create a user b...@example.com, who has a default maildir location for that sql of 'example.com/bob/' I can't quite figure out how to change the SQL to get the folder for bob+t...@example

Re: Create additional sub-folders postfix/courier

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:55:31AM -0500, post...@corwyn.net wrote: > At 11:04 PM 2/10/2009, post...@corwyn.net wrote: >> At 05:24 PM 2/10/2009, mouss wrote: >> While I can readily create a user b...@example.com, who has a default >> maildir location for that sql of 'example.com/bob/' I can't q

Re: Create additional sub-folders postfix/courier

At 01:05 AM 2/11/2009, Victor Duchovni wrote: On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:55:31AM -0500, post...@corwyn.net wrote: This is a bad idea. You are allowing external parties to construct mailbox filenames on your system. Potential for various directory pathname injection attacks: user+./../../

Re: Create additional sub-folders postfix/courier

At 01:31 AM 2/11/2009, post...@corwyn.net wrote: At 01:05 AM 2/11/2009, Victor Duchovni wrote: On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:55:31AM -0500, post...@corwyn.net wrote: This is a bad idea. You are allowing external parties to construct mailbox filenames on your system. Potential for various directory

Re: Create additional sub-folders postfix/courier

And a last betterer/simpler way to do it. SELECT if(INSTR(maildir,'+'),concat(left(maildir,instr(maildir,'+')-1),'/Maildir/.',right(maildir,length(maildir)-instr(maildir,'+'))),CONCAT(maildir,'Maildir/')) from mailbox where username ='%s' and active='1'