Feature Request: lmtp --> content_filter --> lmtpd

d a bad idea, or just a new idea? Thanks, Rick van Rein

Re: Feature Request: lmtp --> content_filter --> lmtpd

Hi Viktor, > By all means deploy an LMTP content_filter, but use SMTP to re-inject > the filtered messages. If a group of recipients temp-fails the > re-injection, send a failure code for that group to the front-end > LMTP client. Yes, that should also work, thanks. I was focussing on passing f

Re: Simple mailing list: Possible for multiple domains?

Hi Tom, > For example: Incoming mail for for "need...@foo.com > " and "need...@bar.com > " are sent to separate subscriber lists. That will work if you create the lists in the virtual map. You probably should have an SRS setup to get through properly. -Rick

Re: Simple mailing list: Possible for multiple domains?

Hi Tom, > So please excuse my ignorance, but what is "SRS?" What you are doing constitutes as forwarding, and that means that SPF validation results are invalidated. To your rescue, you won't be changing any of the headers customarily signed with DKIM, so you'll probably get through DMARC valida

Re: Simple mailing list: Possible for multiple domains?

Oh, > srs is not needed with postfix, They are unrelated. However: my remark of needing SRS does assume that he's forwarding for others than his own domains. I agree with Wietse that MailMan solves the same poblem (VERP is similar to SRS, it uses a MAIL FROM: with the local domain) but Tom indi

Re: Simple mailing list: Possible for multiple domains?

Hi, > mailman breaks dkim, its not yahoo's fault I've been arms-wrestling a group mail service with just that type of problem today! and found an easy way out: I found that DKIM signature correctness was retained when the sender included [listname] in the Subject: on their initial message, to av

Lists and spam prevention / use of Reply-To:

a list address under the list bounce domain 3. setup SPF in the list bounce domain 4. this should pass on DMARC, because SPF passes and DKIM fails I'd like to learn if this approach is considered sound by the list. Cheers, Rick van Rein

Re: Lists and spam prevention / use of Reply-To:

Interestingly, This list is a modest exception -- DKIM should pass through it perfectly, mostly because it does not change the Subject: From: To: or body. But the question was about soundness of the general Reply-To: idea anyway. -Rick

Re: Lists and spam prevention / use of Reply-To:

Hello, I should not have used this list as an example :) because it undermined my point. > messages on the Postfix mailing list > usually score with deep negative values in SpamAssassin. You're barking > up the wrong tree here. ;-) My interest in spam is due to the apparent move that email is sl

Re: Lists and spam prevention / use of Reply-To:

Hi, > i noted that it's possible to get dmarc fail on postfix maillist > > its spf none, dkim none, dmarc fail, in my tests, arc is not tested or > planned to be in use I tested your two emails for DKIM, and both failed for me. The ones by Noel and Ralph did get through. I used dkimverify.py fr

Re: Lists and spam prevention / use of Reply-To:

Hah, Thanks for the pointers, especially Ralph! > I disagree about "very good reasons for footers on many lists". Meta > information belongs into the message headers, not the body. I've been thinking along those lines too... there could easily be new header definitions for "Suggested Tagging" an

Feature Request: deduplication with multiple X-Original-To values

mentioned, making it less difficult to choose from for email administrators. I hope this is a useful suggestion :) Thanks, Rick van Rein InternetWide.org / ARPA2.net / OpenFortress.nl

How can I "reject_unverified_LOCAL_sender"?

Hello, I see a lot of spam entering that claims to have come from a local domain, usually guessing a non-existent account. I've been looking for a way to "reject_unverified_local_sender", by which I mean that the sender address is verified iff it occurs in virtual_alias_domains (and perhaps a few

Re: How can I "reject_unverified_LOCAL_sender"?

Hi Philip, > Wouldn't it be a lot easier simply to reject those with SPF? If > you're seeing mail from one of your domains coming in from a host you > know couldn't have legitimately sent it, you can reject it outright. That would block not just the spam, but also legitimate bypassing through fo

Re: How can I "reject_unverified_LOCAL_sender"?

Ah! >> I don't see how I can do this with Postfix, and it's not even simple in >> a policy due to the cyclic risk. What are others doing in this respect? > > /etc/postfix/main.cf > smtpd_reject_unlisted_sender = yes I mistook the documentation of this option to also work on external senders!

Re: Conditional sender rewrite based on recipient address

Hi, > Perhaps with smtp_generic_maps, but not with canonical > maps Which raises something I've wondered before: why is it that the generic_maps cannot be separately setup for header/envelope, and for sender/recipient, like can be done with canonical_maps? I've been struggling with this in the

Re: Cyrus SASL with httpform

Hi Jaco, Although this is not exactly what you are asking, but we're working on HTTP SASL authentication, so one level below the HTML forms that you are talking about. http://internetwide.org/blog/2018/11/15/somethings-cooking-4.html There is an early Docker Demo with a plugin to add SASL to Fir