Hi
http://www.postfix.org/header_checks.5.html
RULE: /X-Virus-Scanned/ REPLACE X-Virus-Scanned: Yes
BEFORE: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.4 at testserver.rhsoft.net
NOW:X-Virus-Scanned: Yes
so far, so nice
_
but in case of "X-Spam-Status" i am out
On 08/11/2014 01:00 PM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
> Hi
>
> http://www.postfix.org/header_checks.5.html
>
> RULE: /X-Virus-Scanned/ REPLACE X-Virus-Scanned: Yes
> BEFORE: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.4 at testserver.rhsoft.net
> NOW:X-Virus-Scanned: Yes
>
> so far, so nice
> __
Why don't you simply configure SpamAssassin to not put the version
number in the header to begin with?
You can use directives like clear_headers, add_headers in your local.cf
configuration file to configure these.
For instance I have these two lines in my local.cf:
clear_headers
add_header all S
thanks looks good
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham
autolearn_force=no
no idea wher the UNPARSEABLE_RELAY comes from and how to disable it :-(
however, i am still interested in REPLACE just for things
like /192\.168\.196\./ REPLACE /84\.113\.92\./
A
Well, this isn't really the right list to discuss SpamAssassin, but a
short reply then:
The UNPARSEABLE_RELAY isn't really a spam-test, but it there to warn you
that your email has one or more Received: lines that cannot be parsed.
Maybe you have accidentally mangled a Received: line with those
he
Hi,
you already did this, but I'll point you to the correct chapter anyway:
RTFM :)
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.4.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#scoring_options
You could probably do everything you want with REPLACE and
backreferences in the regular expressions too, but why complica
Am 11.08.2014 um 14:10 schrieb Erik Logtenberg:
> Well, this isn't really the right list to discuss SpamAssassin, but a
> short reply then:
>
> The UNPARSEABLE_RELAY isn't really a spam-test
i know
> but it there to warn you that your email has one or more
> Received: lines that cannot be pars
Am 11.08.2014 um 14:12 schrieb Tom Hendrikx:
> You're too experienced (and large-mouthed :>) to not know that security
> cannot be obtained through obscurity. Header munging is almost always
> the wrong solution
that don't change the fact that security auditors are happy
if you don't leak inter
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 08:26:21PM -0500, Karol Pomaski wrote:
> I was trying to use my content_filter to create the vacation engine for
> my users. It works as a content_filter but only if the emails are coming
> from outside. I am trying to enable the vacation script to work also for
> local em
Am 11.08.2014 um 16:19 schrieb Alexander Farber:
> Dear postfix users,
> here is what I'm trying at my CentOS 6.5 Linux server
please make a decision if you would like to have that topic
on the CenOS list, on the postfix list or on serverfault
which you linked at the same message to the CentOS li
Greetings!
I have 3 servers connected via lan & vpn.
SERVER-1 is a hosted VM in the cloud
EXTIF eth0 (198.51.100.1, 198.51.100.2, 10.0.1.1)
TUNIF tun1 (192.168.1.1)
SERVER-2 is my LAN's router/firewall
EXTIF eth0 (203.0.113.1)
TUNIF tun1 (192.168.1.2)
INTIF eth1 (10.0.2.1, 172.16.2.1
On 8/11/2014 11:04 AM, terrygalant.li...@fastest.cc wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> I have 3 servers connected via lan & vpn.
>
> SERVER-1 is a hosted VM in the cloud
> EXTIF eth0 (198.51.100.1, 198.51.100.2, 10.0.1.1)
> TUNIF tun1 (192.168.1.1)
>
> SERVER-2 is my LAN's router/firewall
> EXTIF e
On 8/10/2014 8:21 PM, John Mancuso wrote:
> I'm testing out rate control using the "smtpd_client_message_rate_limit"
> parameter. I'm successfully able to relay mail through this server however I
> do not see any mention of anvil in the logs when I send out mails >
> smtpd_client_message_rate_li
Hi Noel
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014, at 09:11 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
> proxy_interfaces should list any external IPs that *this* postfix is
> connected to on the other side of a NAT. Any IPs that are not
> "local" on this box that connect to postfix should be listed here.
By 'connect' you do mean 'repon
On 8/11/2014 11:19 AM, terrygalant.li...@fastest.cc wrote:
> Hi Noel
>
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014, at 09:11 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
>> proxy_interfaces should list any external IPs that *this* postfix is
>> connected to on the other side of a NAT. Any IPs that are not
>> "local" on this box that connec
Perfect, thanks!
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014, at 09:26 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
> Yes, that sounds right.
Hi Folks,
This is mostly a matter of curiosity - but not entirely (I'm rethinking
the high availability strategy for a small cluster):
If a machine crashes while postfix is processing a message - but the
disks are not corrupted - what happens to the message being processed?
I.e., what strat
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 02:01:46PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> If a machine crashes while postfix is processing a message - but the disks
> are not corrupted - what happens to the message being processed?
Messages that Postfix accepted responsibility for (accepted into
its queue) are not lost.
On 8/11/2014 1:01 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> This is mostly a matter of curiosity - but not entirely (I'm
> rethinking the high availability strategy for a small cluster):
>
> If a machine crashes while postfix is processing a message - but the
> disks are not corrupted - what happ
Noel Jones wrote:
On 8/11/2014 1:01 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Hi Folks,
This is mostly a matter of curiosity - but not entirely (I'm
rethinking the high availability strategy for a small cluster):
If a machine crashes while postfix is processing a message - but the
disks are not corrupted - wh
Hi,
I have a fedora20 system with postfix-2.10.3 and have TLS set up and
working correctly, at least to the best of my ability. We have a user that
would like to send email to a system that apparently doesn't support TLS,
but does support SSL. I'd imagine they are referring to SSLv3.
I'm not speci
On 8/11/2014 2:23 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Noel Jones wrote:
>> On 8/11/2014 1:01 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> This is mostly a matter of curiosity - but not entirely (I'm
>>> rethinking the high availability strategy for a small cluster):
>>>
>>> If a machine crashes while po
Am 11.08.2014 um 22:01 schrieb Alex:
> I have a fedora20 system with postfix-2.10.3 and have TLS set up and working
> correctly, at least to the best of my
> ability. We have a user that would like to send email to a system that
> apparently doesn't support TLS, but does
> support SSL. I'd imag
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 04:01:56PM -0400, Alex wrote:
> I have a fedora20 system with postfix-2.10.3 and have TLS set up and
> working correctly, at least to the best of my ability. We have a user that
> would like to send email to a system that apparently doesn't support TLS,
> but does support S
On 8/11/2014 3:01 PM, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a fedora20 system with postfix-2.10.3 and have TLS set up and
> working correctly, at least to the best of my ability. We have a
> user that would like to send email to a system that apparently
> doesn't support TLS, but does support SSL. I'd imagine
Hi,
> > I have a fedora20 system with postfix-2.10.3 and have TLS set up and
> > working correctly, at least to the best of my ability. We have a user
that
> > would like to send email to a system that apparently doesn't support
TLS,
> > but does support SSL. I'd imagine they are referring to SSLv
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:25:50PM -0400, Alex wrote:
> > Yes, though if you make SSL/TLS mandatory (via smtp_tls_policy_maps
> > and the "encrypt" or "secure" levels) then some weaker ciphers are
> > excluded by default.
>
> Okay, just to be sure I understand this correctly, I need to still
> co
On 11 Aug 2014, at 10:22, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 11.08.2014 um 16:19 schrieb Alexander Farber:
Dear postfix users,
here is what I'm trying at my CentOS 6.5 Linux server
please make a decision if you would like to have that topic
on the CenOS list, on the postfix list or on serverfault
whi
Hi,
> Let's talk about one thing at a time. What problem is your user
> reporting?
>
> * An inability to use your server as a submission server, that is,
> to use an MUA like Outlook with your server as its SMTP server?
>
> Or
>
> * An inability to route mail to some remote system via you
First of all let me say I'm brand new to this and maybe actually have this
but have a million questions.
I am running Linux Mint 17
I have installed postfix and dovecot
my hostname is mail.hagensieker.com
Locally everything seems fine. I can telnet to 25 and connect and read
local mail from user
Are your ports open?
http://www.portchecktool.com/
On 08/11/2014 08:02 PM, hagensieker wrote:
> First of all let me say I'm brand new to this and maybe actually have this
> but have a million questions.
>
> I am running Linux Mint 17
> I have installed postfix and dovecot
> my hostname is mail.hag
I'll check that when I get home. Thanks. I do believe it is a port issue
because I can send but not receive.
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Lots-of-Post-Fix-Issues-tp69856p69858.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 08:09:02PM -0400, Alex wrote:
> > To support Outlook as an SSL/TLS submission client, you need to
> > setup the smtps (input) wrapper-mode service as described in
> > TLS_README. Outlook indeed does not support "TLS" (that is
> > STARTTLS) and only supports SSL encapsulate
It shows my ports 25, 143, 587 open.
I can do sendmail someemailaddress.com and it sends outside. The config
that Thunderbird found is only working outbound. Still not inbound. Again
I think it is a port. The test says 25 is working however when I switch to
an outside network and go (telnet I
And here is /var/log/mail.log
One of these is a successful send and the other I believe the failed inbound
Aug 12 14:07:16 mail postfix/smtpd[6849]: connect from localhost[127.0.0.1]
Aug 12 14:07:16 mail postfix/smtpd[6849]: 9ACDA440C86:
client=localhost[127.0.0.1]
Aug 12 14:07:16 mail postfix/cl
And here is dovecot.conf
## Dovecot configuration file
# If you're in a hurry, see http://wiki2.dovecot.org/QuickConfiguration
# "doveconf -n" command gives a clean output of the changed settings. Use it
# instead of copy&pasting files when posting to the Dovecot mailing list.
# '#' character
And finally I think I've stumbled on to something that may be the culprit.
DNS.
Again be gentle with me here because I'm in unchartered waters here.
I own two domains
hagensieker.com (GoDaddy)
hagensieker.org (NameCheap)
My computer hostname is set to mail.hagensieker.com (Is this a problem?)
On 08/12/2014 08:08 AM, hagensieker wrote:
> Terribly confused at this point?
Yes. I recommend that you get the excellent "The Postfix book"[1] by
Ralf and Patrick before getting in the world of e-mail and Postfix. Once
you read it cover to cover and understand the concepts, everything will
becom
Ok I am learning. Here is what i did. I changed my hostname and /etc/hosts
file to reflect hagensieker.org
Then I changed all the appropriate entries in main.cf.
Then changed the host relayhost to the NameCheap relay host. Then restarted
postfix
Then went to Thunderbird on my Linux box and cr
39 matches
Mail list logo
