That is great!
Can you consider override smtpd_service_name based on the reply ?
This would allow to have different smtpd profiles depending on some
criteria defined in the policy daemon .
Thanks,
José Borges Ferreira
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 2:40 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> This is a rough des
> On Sep 19, 2016, at 7:50 AM, Jose Borges Ferreira
> wrote:
>
> That is great!
>
> Can you consider override smtpd_service_name based on the reply ?
> This would allow to have different smtpd profiles depending on some criteria
> defined in the policy daemon .
>
At first I was thinking "Gr
> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:35 AM, Tom Johnson wrote:
>
>
> At first I was thinking "Great, this could help us allow users to have
> enforced TLS for certain senders/recipients", but then I realized that this
> policy is probably be happening after the STARTTLS command, right?
No postscreen(8)
> On Sep 19, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Viktor Dukhovni
> wrote:
>
> Outbound TLS policy by sender is not directly supported, but
> if you're willing to configure separate transports for sufficiently
> large groups of users that desire the same outbound TLS policy, you
> can employ:
>
>
> http://w
Jose Borges Ferreira:
> That is great!
>
> Can you consider override smtpd_service_name based on the reply ?
> This would allow to have different smtpd profiles depending on some
> criteria defined in the policy daemon .
The result of a postscreen test is either 'pass' which is cached,
or some fl
The last time TLD blocking came up, the consensus of the hive was not
to block based on TLD. (You may recall .xyz being used by
Alphabet.) However lately I'm getting a ridiculous number of .stream
SPAM coming through. The RBLs are getting about half.
https://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/tlds/
I h
On 2016-09-20 02:29, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:
The last time TLD blocking came up, the consensus of the hive was not
to block based on TLD. (You may recall .xyz being used by
Alphabet.) However lately I'm getting a ridiculous number of .stream
SPAM coming through. The RBLs are getting about hal
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:29:51PM -0700, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:
> The last time TLD blocking came up, the consensus of the hive was
> not to block based on TLD. (You may recall .xyz being used by
> Alphabet.) However lately I'm getting a ridiculous number of
> .stream SPAM coming through.
Well yeah, they can always buy a .com, etc., but right now .stream has nothing
legit.
The last time this discussion came up (not initiated by me if it matters), I
bought into TLD blocking being bad, but things are different half a year later.
I suppose I can find a more effective RBL, but the
Block? No.
+Score? Yes.
But this is the Postfix list, and ... this really belongs elsewhere.
> The last time TLD blocking came up, the consensus of the hive was not
> to block based on TLD. (You may recall .xyz being used by
> Alphabet.) However lately I'm getting a ridiculous number of .stream
OK. Would I score it in SpamAssassin? If not, where? Point me in the right
direction and I assume Google will be my friend.
Original Message
From: Michael J Wise
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 6:54 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: TLD blocking revisited
Block? No.
+Score? Y
On 2016-09-20 04:08, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:
OK. Would I score it in SpamAssassin? If not, where? Point me in the
right direction and I assume Google will be my friend.
make a tld list in enlist, score that enlist in spamassassin, if need
more help mail me
12 matches
Mail list logo
