On Sat, 30 May 2009, Baltasar Cevc wrote:
On May 28, 2009, at 4:37 PM, Matt Sergeant wrote:
Seems a little fragile. There aren't many bounces that quote all
headers. You'd be better off just rejecting all bounces in qpsmtpd,
then you only see "legit" bounces where the remote end issued an
imme
On May 28, 2009, at 4:37 PM, Matt Sergeant wrote:
Seems a little fragile. There aren't many bounces that quote all
headers. You'd be better off just rejecting all bounces in qpsmtpd,
then you only see "legit" bounces where the remote end issued an
immediate 5xx to your Exim's outgoing mail. Of
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> On Thu, 28 May 2009, David Nicol wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:18 AM, David Favor wrote:
>>
>> I wrote a plugin to create VERP variable envelope return path
>> addresses for each and every message passing through my forwarding
>> sys
On Thu, 28 May 2009, David Nicol wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:18 AM, David Favor wrote:
I host many domains and I'd like to protect them all
against backscatter
I wrote a plugin to create VERP variable envelope return path
addresses for each and every message passing through my forwardi
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:18 AM, David Favor wrote:
> I host many domains and I'd like to protect them all
> against backscatter
I wrote a plugin to create VERP variable envelope return path
addresses for each and every message passing through my forwarding
system, kept track of in a little data
On Thu, 28 May 2009 12:04:27 -0400 (EDT), Charlie Brady wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 May 2009, Matt Sergeant wrote:
>
>> years. So my qpsmtpd runs a no_bounces plugin, which I believe I've
>> posted here before.
>
> Google seems not to have heard of it.
Ah. OK. It basically just does this:
if ($tra
On Thu, 28 May 2009, Matt Sergeant wrote:
years. So my qpsmtpd runs a no_bounces plugin, which I believe I've
posted here before.
Google seems not to have heard of it.
Matt Sergeant wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2009 09:18:32 -0500, David Favor wrote:
I'm currently running qpsmtpd-async.
I host many domains and I'd like to protect them all
against backscatter using something like this:
http://psg.com/~brian/software/authbounce/configure-authbounce.txt
to add a
On Wed, 27 May 2009 09:18:32 -0500, David Favor wrote:
> I'm currently running qpsmtpd-async.
>
> I host many domains and I'd like to protect them all
> against backscatter using something like this:
>
> http://psg.com/~brian/software/authbounce/configure-authbounce.txt
>
> to add a bounce k
David Favor wrote:
I'm currently running qpsmtpd-async.
I host many domains and I'd like to protect them all
against backscatter using something like this:
http://psg.com/~brian/software/authbounce/configure-authbounce.txt
to add a bounce key to each outgoing message of the form:
X-
I'm currently running qpsmtpd-async.
I host many domains and I'd like to protect them all
against backscatter using something like this:
http://psg.com/~brian/software/authbounce/configure-authbounce.txt
to add a bounce key to each outgoing message of the form:
X-bounce-key: $mx-$numbe
Hans Sandsdalen wrote:
Hi
I have to admitt that I am no perl hacker. In other words, I cannot see
how I can do this... :(
Robin Bowes skrev:
Hans Sandsdalen wrote:
Hi
I want my authenticated users to be able to relay. How? I use
auth/auth_flat_file
Hans,
Look at the check_relay plugin.
Hi
I have to admitt that I am no perl hacker. In other words, I cannot see
how I can do this... :(
Robin Bowes skrev:
Hans Sandsdalen wrote:
Hi
I want my authenticated users to be able to relay. How? I use
auth/auth_flat_file
Hans,
Look at the check_relay plugin.
R.
--
mvh Hans Sand
Hans Sandsdalen wrote:
Hi
I want my authenticated users to be able to relay. How? I use
auth/auth_flat_file
Hans,
Look at the check_relay plugin.
R.
Hi
I want my authenticated users to be able to relay. How? I use
auth/auth_flat_file
--
mvh Hans Sandsdalen
-- HANS = High Availability, No Superman --
http://www.spacetec.no
Thanks for the belated feedback.
BTW, I'd have no problem with this being included in the distribution.
Chris
On May 8, 2008, at 5:34 PM, James Turnbull wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Garrigues wrote:
I write my own greylisting plugin some time ago due to proble
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Garrigues wrote:
> I write my own greylisting plugin some time ago due to problems I had
> with the one included. I posted it on this list, but never got any
> comments on it.
>
> See
>
> http://www.trinsics.com/blog/?p=59
>
> I've b
ROTECTED]>
250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, sender OK - how exciting to get mail from you!
RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
550 Relaying denied (#5.7.1)
QUIT
221 mx3.maildev.net closing connection. Have a wonderful day.
Second attempt (Log)
greylisting plugin: key
10.25.201.81:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:[EMAIL PROTECTED] updated grey->white
intervenes before
rcpt_ok throws the "Relaying denied" message.
The greylisting plugin should respect check_relay and ignore relay
clients. There's a block of tests in sub denysoft_greylist that check
for exceptions, which is why I wondered about the plugin order :
# Alwa
If I'm reading the code right, check_relay does
the checks but the rejection doesn't happen until the rcpt_ok plugin
runs. So, it looks like the greylisting plugin intervenes before
rcpt_ok throws the "Relaying denied" message.
Also, this host doesn't do any client r
Chris Babcock wrote:
( Sorry, the first one I sent had some unintended crap in the headers. )
I've been experimenting with the greylisting plugin a bit lately, and
I've noticed some odd behavior.
It seems that mail for domains that aren't in rcpthosts that would
normally get a 5xx message an
xciting to get mail from you!
RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
550 Relaying denied (#5.7.1)
QUIT
221 mx3.maildev.net closing connection. Have a wonderful day.
Second attempt (Log)
greylisting plugin: key
10.25.201.81:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:[EMAIL PROTECTED] updated grey->white
eady; send us your mail, but not
your spam.
HELO test
250 mx3.maildev.net Hi [10.25.201.81] [10.25.201.81]; I am so happy to
meet you.
MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, sender OK - how exciting to get mail from you!
RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
550 Relayin
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Ask Bj?rn Hansen wrote:
On Sep 23, 2007, at 9:35 PM, Sydney Bogaert wrote:
The problem I think is that this config is found in the .tar.gz file, the
file that most people download and install as is...
Yeah, I'm thinking of rolling a 0.41 with the changes we have now.
Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 23, 2007, at 9:35 PM, Sydney Bogaert wrote:
>>
>>> The problem I think is that this config is found in the .tar.gz file,
>>> the file that most people download and install as is...
>>
>> Yeah, I'm thinking of rolling a 0.41 with the change
Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
On Sep 23, 2007, at 9:35 PM, Sydney Bogaert wrote:
The problem I think is that this config is found in the .tar.gz file,
the file that most people download and install as is...
Yeah, I'm thinking of rolling a 0.41 with the changes we have now.
+1
On Sep 23, 2007, at 9:35 PM, Sydney Bogaert wrote:
The problem I think is that this config is found in the .tar.gz
file, the file that most people download and install as is...
Yeah, I'm thinking of rolling a 0.41 with the changes we have now.
- ask
--
http://develooper.com/ - http://ask
>
> > Would it not be a good idea to remove the authnull plugin from the
> > "default" install to avoid this?
>
> Yup, it's gone from svn trunk (since a day or two ago).
>
> - ask
>
> --
> http://develooper.com/ - http://askask.com/
>
The problem I think is that this config is found in the .
On Sep 23, 2007, at 13:18, Angelo Brigante Jr. wrote:
Would it not be a good idea to remove the authnull plugin from the
"default" install to avoid this?
Yup, it's gone from svn trunk (since a day or two ago).
- ask
--
http://develooper.com/ - http://askask.com/
On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Angelo Brigante Jr. wrote:
Would it not be a good idea to remove the authnull plugin from the
"default" install to avoid this?
Please see:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.qpsmtpd/2007/09/msg7373.html
Angelo Brigante Jr. wrote:
>
> Would it not be a good idea to remove the authnull plugin from the
> "default" install to avoid this?
It's been done - Ask removed it recently - see revision #793.
Regards
James Turnbull
--
James Turnbull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Author of Pro Nagios 2.0
(http://
checking of the logs, every incoming connection that issued the
"AUTH LOGIN" command was automatically authenticated, thus allowing
relaying. Apparantly this is the intended behavior of the "proof of concept"
authnull plugin.
I installed qpsmtpd based on the quick install instr
On Sep 20, 2007, at 1:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's my point. From what I can gather, the install of qpsmtpd from
trunk (at least from a few weeks ago) enables the authnull plugin
I took it out, thanks!
--
http://develooper.com/ - http://askask.com/
henticates anyone no matter what they type.
So in answer to your question, yes.
I only noticed that it was relaying because of the large queue to
addresses that didn't exist.
> > Perhaps the trunk plugin config should have them commented out, as this
> > is probably not what anyo
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, I think I've fixed it today. The latest plugin config file
uses the auth plugins, those plugins upon closer inspection say not to
use them in production. Anyway, the upshot is that any spammer can
relay if they login, as it were.
And any s
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 13:56,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I seem to be having a relaying problem.
> ...
> > Anyone any ideas?
>
> My first idea is that you should shut down qmail until you identify your
> configu
On 6-Sep-07, at 8:29 PM, Robert Spier wrote:
Some of this will be easier to fix if if let plugins register to be
run "first" and "last".
Eeep. No. I like the strict ordering guarantees given by the config
file. The first/last stuff ends up just being a morass.
Yes, if you want that, use $
>
> Some of this will be easier to fix if if let plugins register to be
> run "first" and "last".
Eeep. No. I like the strict ordering guarantees given by the config
file. The first/last stuff ends up just being a morass.
>Isn't it mostly a matter of poor naming ?
Only partly, a lot is you need ...
>The plan is, eventually, to have proper APIs and plugin hooks for
>some of the things notes are used for now (whitelists, user
>information, ).
Yeah. For example, I have several plugins that check something e
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ask_Bj=F8rn_Hansen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 00:49:06 -0700
>
>
> On Sep 5, 2007, at 3:27 PM, Chris Garrigues wrote:
>
> > okay...you've demonstrated that the other more sensible way works
> > fine...so why
> > does the default distribution do it the
> From: Johan Almqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 09:33:33 +0200
>
> Chris Garrigues wrote:
> > Two weeks into membership on this list and I'm beginning to realize that
> > the
> > design of plugins is utterly chaotic. Since we're at 0.40, I guess that's
> > okay, but by 1.0
On Sep 5, 2007, at 3:27 PM, Chris Garrigues wrote:
okay...you've demonstrated that the other more sensible way works
fine...so why
does the default distribution do it the way it does?
Isn't it mostly a matter of poor naming ? Those plugins were some of
the first ones when we weren't so w
Chris Garrigues wrote:
Two weeks into membership on this list and I'm beginning to realize that the
design of plugins is utterly chaotic. Since we're at 0.40, I guess that's
okay, but by 1.0 I hope it's no longer true. Is there a roadmap which states
when along the way the distribution will i
> From: "Peter J. Holzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 23:36:37 +0200
>
> > Why doesn't rcpt_ok just return(OK) and the logic for testing rcpthosts get
> > moved to check_relay?
>
> Have a look at
> http://svn.perl.org/viewcvs/qpsmtpd/contrib/hjp/rcpt_accept/rcpt_accept?view=mark
I thought I'd try to understand why
> messages which will be denied due to relaying are even touching my greylist.
>
> After all, check_relay is up near the top of my plugins file.
>
> So, I determined that all check_relay does is to set the relay_client flag
> and
> a te
I just noticed some entries in my greylist for mail from the outside
world destined for domains that aren't mine and thought "Oh oh, am I an open
relay?"
I quickly determined that I'm not, so I thought I'd try to understand why
messages which will be denied due to rela
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I seem to be having a relaying problem.
...
Anyone any ideas?
My first idea is that you should shut down qmail until you identify your
configuration problem.
---
Charlie
On 2007-08-31 12:57:35 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I seem to be having a relaying problem. I have qpsmtpd on our office
> mailserver (cirith-ungol), it's the version before 0.4. I am migrating
> all email to a hosted linux box(biggles) and upgraded to 0.4. I am
> getting a
Lo,
I seem to be having a relaying problem. I have qpsmtpd on our office
mailserver (cirith-ungol), it's the version before 0.4. I am migrating
all email to a hosted linux box(biggles) and upgraded to 0.4. I am
getting a lot of processes like the ones below and have no idea where
they come
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Peacock wrote:
> vvitkov wrote:
>> I have a mail relay machine on which i want simple checks performed.
>> Checks like early talker, dnsbl and some very simple sanities.
>> Then the mail should be relayed to the real MX which will perform
>> spa
> One thing you can consider is queue/smtp-forward, which will start a
> SMTP session with your real MX box. This will have the effect of acting
> like a transparent relay, and any RCPT TO: addresses which would be
> denied will be denied back to the remote server. This happens very late
> in
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, John Peacock wrote:
One thing you can consider is queue/smtp-forward, which will start a SMTP
session with your real MX box. This will have the effect of acting like a
transparent relay, and any RCPT TO: addresses which would be denied will be
denied back to the remote s
vvitkov wrote:
I have a mail relay machine on which i want simple checks performed.
Checks like early talker, dnsbl and some very simple sanities.
Then the mail should be relayed to the real MX which will perform
spam/av detection/marking/clearing
What Robin said, but more directly:
MAKE SURE
vvitkov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am looking for a lightweight and preferably fast solution for my
> problem and looks that qpsmtpd can do the job (at least for the
> lightweight and fast)
>
> Now the idea of the setup
>
> I have a mail relay machine on which i want simple checks performed.
> Checks
Hello,
I am looking for a lightweight and preferably fast solution for my
problem and looks that qpsmtpd can do the job (at least for the
lightweight and fast)
Now the idea of the setup
I have a mail relay machine on which i want simple checks performed.
Checks like early talker, dnsbl and some
ng the external SMTP server the ability to relay to a completely
external domain (yahoo.ca).
If you want to do this (and I'm still not sure I understand why the
external server doesn't just do the external relaying on its own), you
will have to rewrite the smtp-forward to use SMTP AUTH
One example:
The sender is one user of virtual host. The recipient is yahoo.ca.
When smtp-forward plugin is used to forward to another smtp server in
local network, Qpsmtp got error:
24825 Plugin queue::smtp_2dforward, hook queue returned DECLINED, Unable
to queue message ()
24825 451 Unabl
t properly, and then by the time we get to the
> tls plugin, most of the connection settings are just gone.
>
>
>>Also, this shouldn't cause relaying to be denied if relay_client is set,
>>should it?
>
>
> That's another of the connection values th
are just gone.
> Also, this shouldn't cause relaying to be denied if relay_client is set,
> should it?
That's another of the connection values that has gone missing. I'm going to
scatter Data::Dumper->Dump()'s throughout the core to see where the connection
informati
gt; remote_info
> +relay_client
> ),
> ));
> $self->qp->reset_transaction;
Yup. Just tried this again with the same result - I still get relaying
denied.
I checked the return values in the adaptive logging program and I see
that rel
John Peacock said the following on 03/01/2006 15:50:
> Robin Bowes wrote:
>
>> Robin Bowes said the following on 03/01/2006 13:11:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've just started playing around with the tls plugin with the latest
>>> 0.31.1 branch a
Robin Bowes wrote:
Robin Bowes said the following on 03/01/2006 13:11:
Hi,
I've just started playing around with the tls plugin with the latest
0.31.1 branch and it seems to break relaying support.
I forgot to add, relaying is enabled for localhost using tcpserver and
/etc/stcp.smtp.c
Robin Bowes said the following on 03/01/2006 13:11:
> Hi,
>
> I've just started playing around with the tls plugin with the latest
> 0.31.1 branch and it seems to break relaying support.
I forgot to add, relaying is enabled for localhost using tcpserver and
/etc/stcp.smtp.cdb t
Hi,
I've just started playing around with the tls plugin with the latest
0.31.1 branch and it seems to break relaying support.
I'm using swaks for testing. Here's a couple of sample runs (I've
replaced my email address and the hostname):
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# swaks --ser
('authmethod', 'pop-before-smtp');
In any case the plugin will return 'DECLINED'. Now i'm still not happy with
the $ENV{'RELAYCLIENT'} = ''; part, because in my opinion using an
environment variable to signal relaying to the rest of qpsmtpd is bad
pra
> I suspect because the only time the code cares about whether this
> transaction is permitted to relay is at FROM.
I guess you mean at 'RCPT TO'.
> a) the mail will be accepted for local delivery (and it isn't really
> relaying)
Hmm. My intention is to be able to l
Michael Holzt wrote:
Why is the relaying flag on transaction level anyway?
I suspect because the only time the code cares about whether this transaction is
permitted to relay is at FROM. Once you receive the FROM line, you have all of
the information needed to decide whether this e-mail should
> Transaction notes are cleared at MAIL FROM. You need to use connection
> notes.
Ok, this leads to another problem/question. We store the allowance to relay
in transaction->relaying. But because this seems to be cleared as well,
modules like Auth.pm can not use this, but have to
Matt Sergeant wrote:
> I'm trying to clean up the code for relaying again. One thing I'm
> trying to make easy is that my code for spam scanning (among other
> things) does not get applied to relayed mail (because there are things
> in there it will cause to get tripped). In
I'm trying to clean up the code for relaying again. One thing I'm
trying to make easy is that my code for spam scanning (among other
things) does not get applied to relayed mail (because there are things
in there it will cause to get tripped). In order to achieve this I've
This is a little broken in that one of the functions of relay-ctrl-check
was to make sure that the file wasn't more the fifteen minutes old. If
it was it was delete the file and not allow relaying.
This code won't clean up old ip addresses and potentially allow them to
relay foreve
> "Matt" == Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Matt> There was a recent thread about this here:
Matt> http://nntp.x.perl.org/group/perl.qpsmtpd/460 and more
OK, I gotta say that this is by far the easiest mail-hacking system
that I've ever laid my hands on. Wow! The majority
On Sunday, 31 August 2003, at 18:05, Reuven M. Lerner wrote:
I just discovered qpsmtpd in the last 48 hours, and I'm extremely
impressed. Kudos to the developers of this amazing package!
There's only one thing stopping me from switching 100 percent over to
qpsmtpd, and that's my mobility: I want
I just discovered qpsmtpd in the last 48 hours, and I'm extremely
impressed. Kudos to the developers of this amazing package!
There's only one thing stopping me from switching 100 percent over to
qpsmtpd, and that's my mobility: I want to be able to relay my mail
via the qmail SMTP server on my c
Does anybody know of any working solutions for this, or any
good way of dynamic relay access without making all of our
users have to configure smtpauth?
--
---
Michael T. Halligan
Chief Geek
Halligan Infrastructure Designs.
2250 Jerrold Ave #11
San Francisco, CA 94124
(415
ected to localhost.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 rander.dk ESMTP qpsmtpd 0.12-dev ready; send us your mail, but not your
> [...]
> rcpt to: [address]
> 450 Could not determine of relaying is allowed
I changed the error message to "No plugin decided if relaying is
allowe
pt to: [address]
450 Could not determine of relaying is allowed
where address is a local address... What exactly is going wrong here?
It seems to me that not everything is started correctly, as I can see in
log/run that it should create a main-directory for the log when qbsmtpd is
started, but it d
77 matches
Mail list logo
