Reread. I don't not block port 25.
I assure you, OVH has been used for C&C by hackers. Angler comes to mind.
Original Message
From: Dominic Raferd
Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 11:42 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org; li...@lazygranch.com
Subject: Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the f
On 4 January 2017 at 08:53, wrote:
> Reread. I don't not block port 25.
>
> I assure you, OVH has been used for C&C by hackers. Angler comes to mind.
>
> Original Message
> From: Dominic Raferd
> Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 11:42 PM
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org; li...@lazygranch.com
> Sub
But the point is OVH servers have no need to access submission, pop3, or imap.
I have reduced the attack surface.
I can receive email from OVH servers since I provide no filtering on port 25
other than a few RBLs.
I don't condone filtering port 25. Leave that to the RBLs. But don't get in the
Is there a list somewhere of just what options can be logged with “-o
syslog_name=x” ?
> On 4 Jan 2017, at 04:12, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:36 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht
>> wrote:
>>
>> Add syslog_name to the appropriate service in master.cf.
>>
>> -o syslog_name=
Greetings and a happy new year,
I still am in a situation where I occasionally need to have an SMTP
client (preferable Postfix's) talk through an SSH tunnel.
I know we have the smtp(8) client, and we have the pipe(8) client for
injecting RFC5322 stuff into commands, but what I need is some form
Matthias Andree:
> Greetings and a happy new year,
>
>
> I still am in a situation where I occasionally need to have an SMTP
> client (preferable Postfix's) talk through an SSH tunnel.
>
> I know we have the smtp(8) client, and we have the pipe(8) client for
> injecting RFC5322 stuff into comman
On 01/04/2017 12:47 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Matthias Andree:
>> Greetings and a happy new year,
>>
>>
>> I still am in a situation where I occasionally need to have an SMTP
>> client (preferable Postfix's) talk through an SSH tunnel.
>>
>> I know we have the smtp(8) client, and we have the pipe(
Matthias Andree wrote:
> Greetings and a happy new year,
>
>
> I still am in a situation where I occasionally need to have an SMTP
> client (preferable Postfix's) talk through an SSH tunnel.
>
> I know we have the smtp(8) client, and we have the pipe(8) client for
> injecting RFC5322 stuff into co
> > workaround is to establish SSH port forwarding asynchronously, and that
> > is a fragile setup that I would like to replace by something synchronous
> You need to make smtp(8) talk to a TCP port (or UNIX-domain port),
> an arrange for a little daemon that listens on that port, and that
> invok
Am 04.01.2017 um 12:47 schrieb Wietse Venema:
>
> You need to make smtp(8) talk to a TCP port (or UNIX-domain port),
> an arrange for a little daemon that listens on that port, and that
> invokes ssh when a connection is established to that port. Then
> the little daemon shuttles bits up and down.
On 2016-12-28 09:36, Alice Wonder wrote:
On 12/28/2016 12:28 AM, John Fawcett wrote:
On 12/28/2016 08:32 AM, Alice Wonder wrote:
Virtual machine for a web application, it is still in testing.
reverse DNS is properly set up.
Postfix only listens on the local host.
Linux firewall drops anything
If you are on linux, would you find these commands helpful ?
pgrep master|xargs ps –fp
Example Output:
UIDPID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD
root 7437 1 0 2016 ?00:29:41 /usr/libexec/postfix/master
pgrep -u postfix|xargs ps –fp
Example Output
Matthias Andree:
> Am 04.01.2017 um 12:47 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> >
> > You need to make smtp(8) talk to a TCP port (or UNIX-domain port),
> > an arrange for a little daemon that listens on that port, and that
> > invokes ssh when a connection is established to that port. Then
> > the little daemo
Marco Pizzoli:
> Hi all,
> I have a multi-instance setup.
> By doing "ps -ef", as expected, I see a lot of "master" processes.
> Is there a way to see which master is related to which instance at a glance?
# postfix status
postfix/postfix-script: the Postfix mail system is running: PID: 1290
postf
Is there a way to delay re-sending a message following an onward
rejection? I am getting occasional messages back from an onward server
(gmail) about a bad email; within a second we remove the bad email
from the queue and block the originator's ip. But sometimes the first
of these actions is too la
Dominic Raferd:
> My idea is to force a delay (2 seconds say) between the initial
> failure and the re-sending of the same email (same queue-id) to the
> secondary mx (or fallback relay) - in the intervening time the message
> may be pulled from the queue. Following earlier advice from Wietse
> her
> On Jan 4, 2017, at 2:44 AM, Marco Pizzoli wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I have a multi-instance setup.
> By doing "ps -ef", as expected, I see a lot of "master" processes.
> Is there a way to see which master is related to which instance at a glance?
"postfix status" will output the pid of each instan
On 4 January 2017 at 16:52, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Dominic Raferd:
>> My idea is to force a delay (2 seconds say) between the initial
>> failure and the re-sending of the same email (same queue-id) to the
>> secondary mx (or fallback relay) - in the intervening time the message
>> may be pulled fr
Dominic Raferd:
> > You can reduce the number of MX hosts to try to just 1, by setting
> > up an SMTP client for gmail etc. that has
> >
> > smtp -o smtp_mx_session_limit=1
> >
> > With that, Postfix still tries multiple MX hosts until one responds,
> > and you will have $min_backoff-time or mo
19 matches
Mail list logo