LuKreme wrote:
On 14-May-2009, at 17:29, mouss wrote:
LuKreme a écrit :
I think I have it all sussed out, except there doesn’t seem to be an
init script installed under FreeBSD.
because fail2ban works on freebsd?
I meant a script to start fail2ban, like in rc.d (init.d in Linux). Am
I the
Joey wrote:
Hello All,
I am receiving message from people faking like they are from our
domain, when looking in the headers I see this:
Received-SPF: permerror (mydomain.com: Junk encountered in mechanism
'+ptr:')
Whatever you do, don't post your SPF record to enable people
to hel
Hi guys,
I'm setting up a new box using Dovecot SASL (all my other servers use
saslauthd at the moment) and Postfix 2.5.5.
Sending on submission with SMTP AUTH works fine, but not for smtps.
Sending from a mail client I get the following in the logs:
May 14 14:56:08 server01 postfix/smtpd[27846]:
On May 15, 2009, at 1:24, Corey Chandler wrote:
LuKreme wrote:
On 14-May-2009, at 17:29, mouss wrote:
LuKreme a écrit :
I think I have it all sussed out, except there doesn’t seem to
be an
init script installed under FreeBSD.
because fail2ban works on freebsd?
I meant a script to star
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 08:42:55AM +0100, Guy wrote:
> Sending on submission with SMTP AUTH works fine, but not for smtps.
>
> 220 pichi.localdomain.net ESMTP Postfix (Ubuntu)
> AUTH PLAIN
You should have sent EHLO first, and reported the output.
Clients old/lame enough to want smtps rather th
Hi Viktor,
2009/5/15 Victor Duchovni :
> You should have sent EHLO first, and reported the output.
I'll remember that for next time thanks.
> Clients old/lame enough to want smtps rather than STARTTLS, generally
> also want AUTH LOGIN, not AUTH PLAIN.
That was the problem. Was doing the testing
LuKreme:
> On 14-May-2009, at 17:29, mouss wrote:
> > LuKreme a _crit :
> >> I think I have it all sussed out, except there doesn_t seem to be an
> >> init script installed under FreeBSD.
>
> > because fail2ban works on freebsd?
>
> I meant a script to start fail2ban, like in rc.d (init.d in Linu
After many years I noticed in my current config that the local users aren't
working properly.
Specifically I have a hostname in "mydestination" (h7.zynet2.co.uk) and I want
to accept email for "r...@h7.zynet2.co.uk"
This email is currently delivered correctly if submitted from a trusted user
o
Hi,
I'm trying to find a nice solution for the following problem:
we offer backup MX facilities for many customer domains. For this, we
have a number of mailservers (currently 5). An F5 loadbalancer
distributes SMTP connections between these mailservers.
Of course, sometimes customers want to se
Hi,
I have couple of postfix servers (ie same domain multiple mx) and
needs to have a web based interface for tracing mails based on
sender/receipient etc. greping logs from multiple servers for a
sender/recipient is tedious and I stated looking for writing a web
based tool for it. I found that p
2009/5/15 LuKreme :
> Now, just to double check, if postfix is compiled with PCRE then it doesn't
> matter if the table is named regex or pcre, it uses and understands pcre,
> right?
A PCRE regex in a "regexp" table would still be incorrect. I've not
tested this, but I assume you'd get some failur
* Barney Desmond :
> 2009/5/15 LuKreme :
> > Now, just to double check, if postfix is compiled with PCRE then it doesn't
> > matter if the table is named regex or pcre, it uses and understands pcre,
> > right?
>
> A PCRE regex in a "regexp" table would still be incorrect.
Yes. But with simple stu
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:11:00AM -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 14-May-2009, at 20:19, Noel Jones wrote:
>> You're right, that's a pcre construct and not universally supported by
>> regexp. A more portable expression would be:
>>
>> /operator#[0-...@somephishingbanksite\.com$/ REJECT phishing
>
>
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:29:00PM +0200, Teun Vink wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to find a nice solution for the following problem:
>
> we offer backup MX facilities for many customer domains. For this, we
> have a number of mailservers (currently 5). An F5 loadbalancer
> distributes SMTP connect
LuKreme wrote:
On 14-May-2009, at 20:19, Noel Jones wrote:
You're right, that's a pcre construct and not universally supported by
regexp. A more portable expression would be:
/operator#[0-...@somephishingbanksite\.com$/ REJECT phishing
Now, just to double check, if postfix is compiled with
Hi,
I look for a tool like Archivemail (
http://archivemail.sourceforge.net ) but I need to archive my mails in
Maildir format. Archivemail archives only in mbox format.
My purpose : I need to backup old mails (eg : older than 180 days)
from one imap server to another imap server.
Backup mail is
+--
| On 2009-05-15 18:29:50, KLEIN St?phane wrote:
|
| I look for a tool like Archivemail (
| http://archivemail.sourceforge.net ) but I need to archive my mails in
| Maildir format. Archivemail archives only in mbox form
Victor Duchovni:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:29:00PM +0200, Teun Vink wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to find a nice solution for the following problem:
> >
> > we offer backup MX facilities for many customer domains. For this, we
> > have a number of mailservers (currently 5). An F5 loadba
Anyone know of a good way to track sender and recipients for each
email message including BCC headers, and insert this into a header?
Im using sender_bcc_maps to implement an email 'auditing' feature,
where a copy of every outgoing message gets sent to an audit account.
I'd like to be abl
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 02:41:17PM -0400, Thomas Ledbetter wrote:
>
> Anyone know of a good way to track sender and recipients for each email
> message including BCC headers, and insert this into a header?
>
> Im using sender_bcc_maps to implement an email 'auditing' feature, where a
> copy of
Drew Tomlinson a écrit :
> [snip]
>
> OK, I think I understand now. uribl is a way to check mail content for
> domains that *appear* in spam, not from where the mail is sent. Good
> idea! I will see about adding that to SpamAssassin.
>
yes. and also consider adding the BRBL (Barracuda DNSBL)
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:33:17AM +0100, Simon Waters wrote:
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> permit_mynetworks,
> reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org,
> check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:6,
> check_recipient_access hash:/etc/postfix/relay-domains,
> c
I must be confused here, but I thought putting SPF like so would ALLOW my
domains, add an expected other domain, and then -all reject the rest. Am I
doing something wrong?
mydomain.com. IN TXT "v=spf1 +a:earth.mydomain.com +ptr:some-other.com
+ptr:mydomain.net -all"
Thanks!
Joey
On Fri, 15 May 2009, LuKreme wrote:
> On 14-May-2009, at 17:29, mouss wrote:
>> LuKreme a écrit :
>>> I think I have it all sussed out, except there doesn’t seem to be an
>>> init script installed under FreeBSD.
>
>> because fail2ban works on freebsd?
>
> I meant a script to start fail2ban, like i
On Fri, 15 May 2009, Joey wrote:
> I must be confused here, but I thought putting SPF like so would ALLOW my
> domains, add an expected other domain, and then -all reject the rest. Am I
> doing something wrong?
>
> mydomain.com. IN TXT "v=spf1 +a:earth.mydomain.com +ptr:some-other.com
> +ptr:myd
On 15-May-2009, at 04:18, Wietse Venema wrote:
LuKreme:
On 14-May-2009, at 17:29, mouss wrote:
LuKreme a _crit :
I think I have it all sussed out, except there doesn_t seem to be
an
init script installed under FreeBSD.
because fail2ban works on freebsd?
I meant a script to start fail2ba
mouss wrote:
Drew Tomlinson a écrit :
[snip]
OK, I think I understand now. uribl is a way to check mail content for
domains that *appear* in spam, not from where the mail is sent. Good
idea! I will see about adding that to SpamAssassin.
It appears that SpamAssassin 3.2.5 with sa-up
LuKreme:
> On 15-May-2009, at 04:18, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > LuKreme:
> >> On 14-May-2009, at 17:29, mouss wrote:
> >>> LuKreme a _crit :
> I think I have it all sussed out, except there doesn_t seem to be
> an
> init script installed under FreeBSD.
> >>
> >>> because fail2ban wor
On 15-May-2009, at 09:37, Noel Jones wrote:
(The situation is confused by some linux vendors that include an
enhanced regexp library with some of the pcre features. So \d may
work on SOME regexp libraries, but it certainly isn't widely
portable regexp syntax, and Viktor was right to point o
On 15-May-2009, at 12:58, mouss wrote:
Drew Tomlinson a écrit :
[snip]
OK, I think I understand now. uribl is a way to check mail content
for
domains that *appear* in spam, not from where the mail is sent. Good
idea! I will see about adding that to SpamAssassin.
yes. and also consider
30 matches
Mail list logo
