Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting delivery failure notifications

[Sam Clippinger via spamdyke-users]

That's very unusual, it sounds like a setting on their server.  It's been a 
long time, but I remember a setting on old sendmail servers that would send an 
"advisory message" if an email had been sitting in the queue too long.  It was 
just a "by the way" notice (and it always confused every user who received it), 
saying the server had failed to deliver the message so far but it would 
continue trying for X hours.  Maybe something like that is happening here -- 
the message is being stopped by graylisting but the remote server doesn't retry 
it very often, so it sits in the queue long enough to send a warning to the 
user?  I suppose you could fix it by either reducing the overall graylisting 
time on your server or by turning off graylisting for messages from their 
domain (using a configuration directory).

-- Sam Clippinger




On Aug 18, 2017, at 11:24 AM, Quinn Comendant via spamdyke-users 
 wrote:

> A client using our Spamdyke-enabled mail server has reported someone sending 
> them an email received a "bounce" message notifying the sender that the 
> messages has been graylisted (see the delivery failure notification below). 
> They did receive the message (graylisting works well for us).
> 
> This is the first time I've heard of a soft failure resulting in a 
> notification returning to the sender. If graylisting is a common practice, 
> these notifications must be terribly annoying, however the sender (from the 
> cdph.ca.gov network) seems surprised by the message. So either: A) 
> graylisting is not very common, or B) cdph.ca.gov has an uncommon setup that 
> sends annoying bounce messages.
> 
> If graylisting will result in annoying senders with delivery failure 
> notifications, I'd prefer to avoid that by disabling graylisting (doesn't 
> matter who is to blame, what the RFCs say, etc).
> 
> What do y'all think? 
> 
> Regards,
> Quinn
> 
> The delivery failure notification received:
> 
>> Hi Barb and Steph - 
>> 
>> When the email below went out yesterday, the following message was received:
>> 
>> redac...@clientdomain.org...
>> Deferred: 421 Your address has been graylisted. Try again later.
>> 
>> redac...@clientdomain.org...
>> Deferred: 421 Your address has been graylisted. Try again later.
>> 
>> Patricia 
>> Care Operations Advisor
>> Office of AIDS
>> California Department of Public Health
> ___
> spamdyke-users mailing list
> spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] Graylisting delivery failure notifications

[Quinn Comendant via spamdyke-users]

A client using our Spamdyke-enabled mail server has reported someone sending 
them an email received a "bounce" message notifying the sender that the 
messages has been graylisted (see the delivery failure notification below). 
They did receive the message (graylisting works well for us).

This is the first time I've heard of a soft failure resulting in a notification 
returning to the sender. If graylisting is a common practice, these 
notifications must be terribly annoying, however the sender (from the 
cdph.ca.gov network) seems surprised by the message. So either: A) graylisting 
is not very common, or B) cdph.ca.gov has an uncommon setup that sends annoying 
bounce messages.

If graylisting will result in annoying senders with delivery failure 
notifications, I'd prefer to avoid that by disabling graylisting (doesn't 
matter who is to blame, what the RFCs say, etc).

What do y'all think? 

Regards,
Quinn

The delivery failure notification received:

> Hi Barb and Steph - 
> 
> When the email below went out yesterday, the following message was received:
> 
> redac...@clientdomain.org...
> Deferred: 421 Your address has been graylisted. Try again later.
> 
> redac...@clientdomain.org...
> Deferred: 421 Your address has been graylisted. Try again later.
> 
> Patricia 
> Care Operations Advisor
> Office of AIDS
> California Department of Public Health
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting problem

[Sergio Minini (NETKEY)]

Thanks Sam!
I have been using this settings w/o problems in other box.
I have folders for all desired domains (thus the 'only' level), but 
never used the other options.

Should it be tested in the --config-test?

I will create one of the other files and see what happens.

-Sergio

Sam Clippinger escribió:
 div class=moz-text-flowed style=font-family: -moz-fixedThe 
 problem is your graylist-level option.  You have it set to only 
 which requires two things: first you must create a folder for each 
 domain that should be graylisted, and second you must also use one (or 
 more) of the options  graylist-exception-ip-entry, 
 graylist-exception-ip-file, graylist-exception-rdns-dir, 
 graylist-exception-rdns-entry or graylist-exception-rdns-file.

 Try changing graylist-level to always-create-dir -- that's 
 probably what you want.

 -- Sam Clippinger

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] Graylisting problem

[Sergio Minini (NETKEY)]

Hi list,
I have a new QMToaster box that I cannot make graylisting work.
I run the spamdyke test and produced no errors.
I used this same config in other box and worked perfectly for a couple of
years.
The graylisting folder is in the same folder as the Maildirs, so i think
permissions are OK.

What am I missing?

Here the config files and results:


** SPAMDYKE.CONF **
cat /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
tls-certificate-file=/var/qmail/control/servercert.pem
reject-empty-rdns=yes
reject-unresolvable-rdns=yes
log-level=verbose
local-domains-file=/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
policy-url=http://www.domain.com/policy.html
max-recipients=15
idle-timeout-secs=400
graylist-level=only
graylist-dir=/home/vpopmail/graylist
graylist-min-secs=300
graylist-max-secs=1814400
ip-whitelist-file=/var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
greeting-delay-secs=5
sender-blacklist-file=/var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
sender-whitelist-file=/var/qmail/control/whitelist
ip-blacklist-file=/var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
dns-blacklist-entry=zen.spamhaus.org
dns-blacklist-entry=bl.spamcop.net

** RUN FILE: **
cat /var/qmail/supervise/smtp/run
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`id -u vpopmail`
NOFILESGID=`id -g vpopmail`
MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
SPAMDYKE=/usr/local/bin/spamdyke
SPAMDYKE_CONF=/etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
SMTPD=/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
TCP_CDB=/etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp.cdb
HOSTNAME=`hostname`
VCHKPW=/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw
REQUIRE_AUTH=0

exec /usr/bin/softlimit -m 6400 \
 /usr/bin/tcpserver -v -R -H -l $HOSTNAME -x $TCP_CDB -c $MAXSMTPD \
 -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp \
 $SPAMDYKE --config-file $SPAMDYKE_CONF \
 $SMTPD $VCHKPW /bin/true 21
 
** TEST COMMAND: **
 # /usr/bin/softlimit -m 6400 /usr/bin/tcpserver -u 89 -g 89 -v -R -H -l
hostname -x /etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp.cdb -c 25  0 smtp
/usr/local/bin/spamdyke --config-file /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
--config-test --config-test-smtpauth-username u...@domain.com.ar
--config-test-smtpauth-password usrpwd /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /bin/true 21

** TEST RESULT: **
tcpserver: status: 0/25
tcpserver: status: 1/25
tcpserver: pid 16494 from 67.100.192.205
tcpserver: ok 16494 hostname:200.80.54.24:25 :67.100.192.205::2938
spamdyke 4.1.0+TLS+CONFIGTEST+DEBUG (C)2010 Sam Clippinger, samc (at)
silence (dot) org
http://www.spamdyke.org/

Use -h for an option summary or see README.html for complete option details.

Testing configuration...
WARNING: Running tests as user vpopmail(89), group vchkpw(89). Is this the
same user and group the mail server uses?
SUCCESS: spamdyke binary (/usr/local/bin/spamdyke) is not owned by root
and/or is not marked setuid.
INFO: Running command to test capabilities: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
SUCCESS: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd appears to offer TLS support but
spamdyke will intercept and decrypt the TLS traffic so all of its filters
can operate.
SUCCESS: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd appears to offer SMTP AUTH support.
spamdyke will observe any authentication and trust its response.
INFO(config-file): Testing file read: /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
SUCCESS(config-file): Opened for reading: /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
INFO(dns-resolv-conf): Testing file read: /etc/resolv.conf
SUCCESS(dns-resolv-conf): Opened for reading: /etc/resolv.conf
INFO(graylist-level): Testing graylist directory: /home/vpopmail/graylist
INFO(graylist-level): Local domain has no domain directory; no graylisting
will take place for the domain: aiconkk.com
SUCCESS(graylist-level): Graylist directory tests succeeded:
/home/vpopmail/graylist
INFO(hostname-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/me
SUCCESS(hostname-file): Opened for reading: /var/qmail/control/me
INFO(ip-blacklist-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
SUCCESS(ip-blacklist-file): Opened for reading:
/var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
INFO(ip-whitelist-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
SUCCESS(ip-whitelist-file): Opened for reading:
/var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
INFO(local-domains-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
SUCCESS(local-domains-file): Opened for reading:
/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
INFO(sender-blacklist-file): Testing file read:
/var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
SUCCESS(sender-blacklist-file): Opened for reading:
/var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
INFO(sender-whitelist-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/whitelist
SUCCESS(sender-whitelist-file): Opened for reading:
/var/qmail/control/whitelist
INFO(tls-certificate-file): Testing TLS by initializing SSL/TLS library with
certificate and key
SUCCESS(tls-certificate-file): Opened for reading:
/var/qmail/control/servercert.pem
SUCCESS(tls-certificate-file): Certificate and key loaded; SSL/TLS library
successfully initialized
SUCCESS: Tests complete. No errors detected.
tcpserver: end 16494 status 0
tcpserver: status: 0/25

** l /home/vpopmail/
total 28
drwxr-xr-x  2 vpopmail vchkpw 4096 Aug 24 03:33 bin
drwxr-xr-x  4 vpopmail 

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting problem

[Carlos Herrera Polo]

Maybe the graylist folder for each domain

2010/8/25 Sergio Minini (NETKEY) smin...@netkey.com.ar

 Hi list,
 I have a new QMToaster box that I cannot make graylisting work.
 I run the spamdyke test and produced no errors.
 I used this same config in other box and worked perfectly for a couple of
 years.
 The graylisting folder is in the same folder as the Maildirs, so i think
 permissions are OK.

 What am I missing?

 Here the config files and results:


 ** SPAMDYKE.CONF **
 cat /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 tls-certificate-file=/var/qmail/control/servercert.pem
 reject-empty-rdns=yes
 reject-unresolvable-rdns=yes
 log-level=verbose
 local-domains-file=/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
 policy-url=http://www.domain.com/policy.html
 max-recipients=15
 idle-timeout-secs=400
 graylist-level=only
 graylist-dir=/home/vpopmail/graylist
 graylist-min-secs=300
 graylist-max-secs=1814400
 ip-whitelist-file=/var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
 greeting-delay-secs=5
 sender-blacklist-file=/var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
 sender-whitelist-file=/var/qmail/control/whitelist
 ip-blacklist-file=/var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
 dns-blacklist-entry=zen.spamhaus.org
 dns-blacklist-entry=bl.spamcop.net

 ** RUN FILE: **
 cat /var/qmail/supervise/smtp/run
 #!/bin/sh
 QMAILDUID=`id -u vpopmail`
 NOFILESGID=`id -g vpopmail`
 MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
 SPAMDYKE=/usr/local/bin/spamdyke
 SPAMDYKE_CONF=/etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 SMTPD=/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
 TCP_CDB=/etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp.cdb
 HOSTNAME=`hostname`
 VCHKPW=/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw
 REQUIRE_AUTH=0

 exec /usr/bin/softlimit -m 6400 \
 /usr/bin/tcpserver -v -R -H -l $HOSTNAME -x $TCP_CDB -c $MAXSMTPD \
 -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp \
 $SPAMDYKE --config-file $SPAMDYKE_CONF \
 $SMTPD $VCHKPW /bin/true 21

 ** TEST COMMAND: **
  # /usr/bin/softlimit -m 6400 /usr/bin/tcpserver -u 89 -g 89 -v -R -H
 -l
 hostname -x /etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp.cdb -c 25  0 smtp
 /usr/local/bin/spamdyke --config-file /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 --config-test --config-test-smtpauth-username u...@domain.com.ar
 --config-test-smtpauth-password usrpwd /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
 /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /bin/true 21

 ** TEST RESULT: **
 tcpserver: status: 0/25
 tcpserver: status: 1/25
 tcpserver: pid 16494 from 67.100.192.205
 tcpserver: ok 16494 hostname:200.80.54.24:25 :67.100.192.205::2938
 spamdyke 4.1.0+TLS+CONFIGTEST+DEBUG (C)2010 Sam Clippinger, samc (at)
 silence (dot) org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/

 Use -h for an option summary or see README.html for complete option
 details.

 Testing configuration...
 WARNING: Running tests as user vpopmail(89), group vchkpw(89). Is this the
 same user and group the mail server uses?
 SUCCESS: spamdyke binary (/usr/local/bin/spamdyke) is not owned by root
 and/or is not marked setuid.
 INFO: Running command to test capabilities: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
 SUCCESS: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd appears to offer TLS support but
 spamdyke will intercept and decrypt the TLS traffic so all of its filters
 can operate.
 SUCCESS: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd appears to offer SMTP AUTH support.
 spamdyke will observe any authentication and trust its response.
 INFO(config-file): Testing file read: /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 SUCCESS(config-file): Opened for reading: /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 INFO(dns-resolv-conf): Testing file read: /etc/resolv.conf
 SUCCESS(dns-resolv-conf): Opened for reading: /etc/resolv.conf
 INFO(graylist-level): Testing graylist directory: /home/vpopmail/graylist
 INFO(graylist-level): Local domain has no domain directory; no graylisting
 will take place for the domain: aiconkk.com
 SUCCESS(graylist-level): Graylist directory tests succeeded:
 /home/vpopmail/graylist
 INFO(hostname-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/me
 SUCCESS(hostname-file): Opened for reading: /var/qmail/control/me
 INFO(ip-blacklist-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
 SUCCESS(ip-blacklist-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
 INFO(ip-whitelist-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
 SUCCESS(ip-whitelist-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
 INFO(local-domains-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
 SUCCESS(local-domains-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
 INFO(sender-blacklist-file): Testing file read:
 /var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
 SUCCESS(sender-blacklist-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
 INFO(sender-whitelist-file): Testing file read:
 /var/qmail/control/whitelist
 SUCCESS(sender-whitelist-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/whitelist
 INFO(tls-certificate-file): Testing TLS by initializing SSL/TLS library
 with
 certificate and key
 SUCCESS(tls-certificate-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/servercert.pem
 SUCCESS(tls-certificate-file): Certificate and key loaded; SSL/TLS library
 successfully initialized

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting problem

[Sam Clippinger]

The problem is your graylist-level option.  You have it set to only 
which requires two things: first you must create a folder for each 
domain that should be graylisted, and second you must also use one (or 
more) of the options  graylist-exception-ip-entry, 
graylist-exception-ip-file, graylist-exception-rdns-dir, 
graylist-exception-rdns-entry or graylist-exception-rdns-file.

Try changing graylist-level to always-create-dir -- that's probably 
what you want.

-- Sam Clippinger

On 8/25/10 5:24 PM, Sergio Minini (NETKEY) wrote:
 Hi list,
 I have a new QMToaster box that I cannot make graylisting work.
 I run the spamdyke test and produced no errors.
 I used this same config in other box and worked perfectly for a couple of
 years.
 The graylisting folder is in the same folder as the Maildirs, so i think
 permissions are OK.

 What am I missing?

 Here the config files and results:


 ** SPAMDYKE.CONF **
 cat /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 tls-certificate-file=/var/qmail/control/servercert.pem
 reject-empty-rdns=yes
 reject-unresolvable-rdns=yes
 log-level=verbose
 local-domains-file=/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
 policy-url=http://www.domain.com/policy.html
 max-recipients=15
 idle-timeout-secs=400
 graylist-level=only
 graylist-dir=/home/vpopmail/graylist
 graylist-min-secs=300
 graylist-max-secs=1814400
 ip-whitelist-file=/var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
 greeting-delay-secs=5
 sender-blacklist-file=/var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
 sender-whitelist-file=/var/qmail/control/whitelist
 ip-blacklist-file=/var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
 dns-blacklist-entry=zen.spamhaus.org
 dns-blacklist-entry=bl.spamcop.net

 ** RUN FILE: **
 cat /var/qmail/supervise/smtp/run
 #!/bin/sh
 QMAILDUID=`id -u vpopmail`
 NOFILESGID=`id -g vpopmail`
 MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
 SPAMDYKE=/usr/local/bin/spamdyke
 SPAMDYKE_CONF=/etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 SMTPD=/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
 TCP_CDB=/etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp.cdb
 HOSTNAME=`hostname`
 VCHKPW=/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw
 REQUIRE_AUTH=0

 exec /usr/bin/softlimit -m 6400 \
   /usr/bin/tcpserver -v -R -H -l $HOSTNAME -x $TCP_CDB -c $MAXSMTPD \
   -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp \
   $SPAMDYKE --config-file $SPAMDYKE_CONF \
   $SMTPD $VCHKPW /bin/true 21

 ** TEST COMMAND: **
   # /usr/bin/softlimit -m 6400 /usr/bin/tcpserver -u 89 -g 89 -v -R -H -l
 hostname -x /etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp.cdb -c 25  0 smtp
 /usr/local/bin/spamdyke --config-file /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 --config-test --config-test-smtpauth-username u...@domain.com.ar
 --config-test-smtpauth-password usrpwd /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
 /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /bin/true 21

 ** TEST RESULT: **
 tcpserver: status: 0/25
 tcpserver: status: 1/25
 tcpserver: pid 16494 from 67.100.192.205
 tcpserver: ok 16494 hostname:200.80.54.24:25 :67.100.192.205::2938
 spamdyke 4.1.0+TLS+CONFIGTEST+DEBUG (C)2010 Sam Clippinger, samc (at)
 silence (dot) org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/

 Use -h for an option summary or see README.html for complete option details.

 Testing configuration...
 WARNING: Running tests as user vpopmail(89), group vchkpw(89). Is this the
 same user and group the mail server uses?
 SUCCESS: spamdyke binary (/usr/local/bin/spamdyke) is not owned by root
 and/or is not marked setuid.
 INFO: Running command to test capabilities: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
 SUCCESS: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd appears to offer TLS support but
 spamdyke will intercept and decrypt the TLS traffic so all of its filters
 can operate.
 SUCCESS: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd appears to offer SMTP AUTH support.
 spamdyke will observe any authentication and trust its response.
 INFO(config-file): Testing file read: /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 SUCCESS(config-file): Opened for reading: /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf
 INFO(dns-resolv-conf): Testing file read: /etc/resolv.conf
 SUCCESS(dns-resolv-conf): Opened for reading: /etc/resolv.conf
 INFO(graylist-level): Testing graylist directory: /home/vpopmail/graylist
 INFO(graylist-level): Local domain has no domain directory; no graylisting
 will take place for the domain: aiconkk.com
 SUCCESS(graylist-level): Graylist directory tests succeeded:
 /home/vpopmail/graylist
 INFO(hostname-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/me
 SUCCESS(hostname-file): Opened for reading: /var/qmail/control/me
 INFO(ip-blacklist-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
 SUCCESS(ip-blacklist-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/ip-blacklist
 INFO(ip-whitelist-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
 SUCCESS(ip-whitelist-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/whiteiplist
 INFO(local-domains-file): Testing file read: /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
 SUCCESS(local-domains-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
 INFO(sender-blacklist-file): Testing file read:
 /var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
 SUCCESS(sender-blacklist-file): Opened for reading:
 /var/qmail/control/sender-blacklist
 

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting - Recipient address not added to domain directory ...

[Anthony Ercolano]

Well I think I might have my own answer to my question.

It *appears* as though the messages that weren't getting graylisted were sent 
using tls.

On Aug 1, 2010, at 1:11 PM, Anthony Ercolano wrote:

 Please pardon me, if this comes through twice...
 
 I've been using spamdyke for 6 months or so on my server without graylisting 
 and with no problems.
 
 A few days ago I decided to add graylisting.  It seems to be working fine.  
 However, it exhibits a behavior that is confusing me.
 
 I use tmda on the mail server.  (This means that I generally create email 
 address specific to a sender.  e.g. When I gave an email address to my cable 
 company to send me bill notifications it was of the form 
 tony-keyword-comcast.somehashva...@ercolano.com)
 
 I purchased a game that required an email address for activation purposes.  I 
 created a specific address for the game company and used it during the 
 signup. The service was then supposed to send me an activation email.  I 
 figured it would take at least 5 minutes (graylist-min-secs) to see the 
 email.  No!  The email came right through!  The left hand side of the email 
 address that the activation email was sent to was nowhere to be found in the 
 domain dir.  I recieve quite a few daily emails from various organizations, 
 all sent to different email address of the form 
 tony-keyword-somthing.h...@ercolano.com.  I still still seem to be getting 
 all of these daily emails.  However not all of these addresses are showing up 
 in the domain dir.
 
 I then tried an experiment and sent myself an email using the game specific 
 email address from my gmail account.  Now, the left hand side of the address 
 showed up in the domain directory.
 
 I have the feeling I'm missing something about graylisting.  Any ideas?
 
 Thank you for your time,
 Tony
 
 Config:
 Linux kernel 2.6.30.9
 An up to date gentoo using profile: default/linux/x86/10.0
 netqmail-1.06
 TMDA/1.1.12
 Spamdyke 4.0.10 (the most current stable gentoo ebuild)
 
 my spamdyke.conf is as follows:
 
 graylist-level=always-create-dir
 graylist-dir=/dyke/gray
 graylist-max-secs=1209600
 graylist-min-secs=300
 graylist-exception-ip-file=/dyke/gray-exception/exceptio-ip
 smtp-auth-level=none
 relay-level=no-check
 local-domains-file=/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
 max-recipients=some small number
 log-level=error
 dns-blacklist-entry=zen.spamhaus.org
 reject-empty-rdns
 reject-unresolvable-rdns
 
 The exception ip files simply has a list of secure servers that I control.
 

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting - Recipient address not added to domain directory ...

[trog]

Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:

 Anthony Ercolano wrote:
 Well I think I might have my own answer to my question.

 It *appears* as though the messages that weren't getting graylisted were
 sent using tls.


 Very interesting. Upon what are you basing this observation?


It depends upon where you implement your TLS. If your qmail implements  
TLS, and spamdyke passes it through, then spam over TLS will get  
through.

-trog


___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting - Recipient address not added to domain directory ...

[Eric Shubert]

t...@uncon.org wrote:
 Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:
 
 Anthony Ercolano wrote:
 Well I think I might have my own answer to my question.

 It *appears* as though the messages that weren't getting graylisted were
 sent using tls.

 Very interesting. Upon what are you basing this observation?

 
 It depends upon where you implement your TLS. If your qmail implements  
 TLS, and spamdyke passes it through, then spam over TLS will get  
 through.
 
 -trog

Good catch, trog. I'd bet that's exactly what's happening.

Anthony, see http://spamdyke.org/documentation/README.html#TLS
If you add:
tls-certificate-file=/var/qmail/control/servercert.pem
tls-level=smtp
to your spamdyke configuration, that should fix your problem, providing 
that you compiled spamdyke with TLS support.

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] graylisting - Recipient address not added to domain directory ...

[Anthony Ercolano]

Please pardon me, if this comes through twice...

I've been using spamdyke for 6 months or so on my server without graylisting 
and with no problems.

A few days ago I decided to add graylisting.  It seems to be working fine.  
However, it exhibits a behavior that is confusing me.

I use tmda on the mail server.  (This means that I generally create email 
address specific to a sender.  e.g. When I gave an email address to my cable 
company to send me bill notifications it was of the form 
tony-keyword-comcast.somehashva...@ercolano.com)

I purchased a game that required an email address for activation purposes.  I 
created a specific address for the game company and used it during the signup. 
The service was then supposed to send me an activation email.  I figured it 
would take at least 5 minutes (graylist-min-secs) to see the email.  No!  The 
email came right through!  The left hand side of the email address that the 
activation email was sent to was nowhere to be found in the domain dir.  I 
recieve quite a few daily emails from various organizations, all sent to 
different email address of the form tony-keyword-somthing.h...@ercolano.com.  I 
still still seem to be getting all of these daily emails.  However not all of 
these addresses are showing up in the domain dir.

I then tried an experiment and sent myself an email using the game specific 
email address from my gmail account.  Now, the left hand side of the address 
showed up in the domain directory.

I have the feeling I'm missing something about graylisting.  Any ideas?

Thank you for your time,
Tony

Config:
Linux kernel 2.6.30.9
An up to date gentoo using profile: default/linux/x86/10.0
netqmail-1.06
TMDA/1.1.12
Spamdyke 4.0.10 (the most current stable gentoo ebuild)

my spamdyke.conf is as follows:

graylist-level=always-create-dir
graylist-dir=/dyke/gray
graylist-max-secs=1209600
graylist-min-secs=300
graylist-exception-ip-file=/dyke/gray-exception/exceptio-ip
smtp-auth-level=none
relay-level=no-check
local-domains-file=/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
max-recipients=some small number
log-level=error
dns-blacklist-entry=zen.spamhaus.org
reject-empty-rdns
reject-unresolvable-rdns

The exception ip files simply has a list of secure servers that I control.

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting/greylisting behavior, bug or feature?

[trog]

Quoting Demetrio López demetrio.lo...@idecnet.com:

 In my case, this behavior provokes that, if I receive a legitimate
 email, all the SPAM that I receive from any IP with the same sender and
 recipient will be accepted by the greylisting filter.

 I understand that these is not desirable when receive mail from ISPs
 with many outbound servers but it would be ideal that this it was
 configurable.


SPF was designed to deal with this.

-trog
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] graylisting/greylisting behavior, bug or feature?

[Demetrio López]

Hello. I have a problem with greylisting. When an email is accepted by the
sender sen...@domain-from.com to the recipient recipi...@domain-rcpt.com
from an IP then all mail sent to that same sender and recipient are accepted
from any IP. 

Software:

Qmail-LDAP
Spamdyke 4.1.0 (from source)
Debian GNU/Linux 5.0.5


Spamdyke options:

filter-level=normal
greeting-delay-secs=1
log-level=info
log-target=stderr
graylist-level=always
graylist-dir=/var/spamdyke/greylisting
graylist-max-secs=86400
graylist-min-secs=600


--
Atentamente,

Demetrio López.
Departamento de Sistemas, IdecNet S.A.
Centro de Gestión de Red.
Edificio IdecNet. C/Juan XXIII 44.
E-35004, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria,
Islas Canarias - España.
Tfn: +34 828 111 000 Ext: 340


___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting/greylisting behavior, bug or feature?

[Eric Shubert]

I believe that behavior is normal. Will you please explain why you think 
this is a problem?

Note, a successful gray listing isn't necessarily a whitelist. Other 
filtering rules are still applied to subsequent messages, but if a 
message from a 2nd IP address passes other filters, it will not trigger 
a new graylist entry when an active graylist entry exists. If this were 
not the case, emails from large email providers who have pools of 
outbound servers would require graylisting each outbound server, which 
would be undesirable.

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

Demetrio López wrote:
 Hello. I have a problem with greylisting. When an email is accepted by the
 sender sen...@domain-from.com to the recipient recipi...@domain-rcpt.com
 from an IP then all mail sent to that same sender and recipient are accepted
 from any IP. 
 
 Software:
 
 Qmail-LDAP
 Spamdyke 4.1.0 (from source)
 Debian GNU/Linux 5.0.5
 
 
 Spamdyke options:
 
 filter-level=normal
 greeting-delay-secs=1
 log-level=info
 log-target=stderr
 graylist-level=always
 graylist-dir=/var/spamdyke/greylisting
 graylist-max-secs=86400
 graylist-min-secs=600
 
 
 --
 Atentamente,
 
 Demetrio López.
 Departamento de Sistemas, IdecNet S.A.
 Centro de Gestión de Red.
 Edificio IdecNet. C/Juan XXIII 44.
 E-35004, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria,
 Islas Canarias - España.
 Tfn: +34 828 111 000 Ext: 340
 
 
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting/greylisting behavior, bug or feature?

[Sam Clippinger]

Using the IP address of the remote server causes a lot of problems for 
large mail hosts.  I about this here:
 http://www.spamdyke.org/documentation/FAQ.html#SUGGESTION9

-- Sam Clippinger

On 7/11/10 9:39 AM, Demetrio López wrote:
 Hello. I have a problem with greylisting. When an email is accepted by the
 sender sen...@domain-from.com to the recipient recipi...@domain-rcpt.com
 from an IP then all mail sent to that same sender and recipient are accepted
 from any IP.

 Software:

 Qmail-LDAP
 Spamdyke 4.1.0 (from source)
 Debian GNU/Linux 5.0.5


 Spamdyke options:

 filter-level=normal
 greeting-delay-secs=1
 log-level=info
 log-target=stderr
 graylist-level=always
 graylist-dir=/var/spamdyke/greylisting
 graylist-max-secs=86400
 graylist-min-secs=600


 --
 Atentamente,

 Demetrio López.
 Departamento de Sistemas, IdecNet S.A.
 Centro de Gestión de Red.
 Edificio IdecNet. C/Juan XXIII 44.
 E-35004, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria,
 Islas Canarias - España.
 Tfn: +34 828 111 000 Ext: 340


 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting/greylisting behavior, bug or feature?

[Demetrio López]

In my case, this behavior provokes that, if I receive a legitimate 
email, all the SPAM that I receive from any IP with the same sender and 
recipient will be accepted by the greylisting filter.

I understand that these is not desirable when receive mail from ISPs 
with many outbound servers but it would be ideal that this it was 
configurable.


El 11/07/2010 19:55, Eric Shubert escribió:
 I believe that behavior is normal. Will you please explain why you think
 this is a problem?

 Note, a successful gray listing isn't necessarily a whitelist. Other
 filtering rules are still applied to subsequent messages, but if a
 message from a 2nd IP address passes other filters, it will not trigger
 a new graylist entry when an active graylist entry exists. If this were
 not the case, emails from large email providers who have pools of
 outbound servers would require graylisting each outbound server, which
 would be undesirable.


-- 
Atentamente,

Demetrio López.
Departamento de Sistemas, IdecNet S.A.
Centro de Gestión de Red.
Edificio IdecNet. C/Juan XXIII 44.
E-35004, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria,
Islas Canarias - España.
Tfn: +34 828 111 000 Ext: 340
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Istvan Köpe]

I cannot get it work. Look:
cat /var/log/qmail/smtp/current | spamdyke-stats
spamdyke-stats build 2008110408


 Summary 
Allowed:0  0.00%
Timeout:0  0.00%
Errors :0  0.00%
Denied :0  0.00%
Total :0  0.00%



On 16.04.2010 16:30, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
 mail-archive's wrapping of the code made it unusable via a plain
 copy-and-paste, so I cleaned it up manually.  Here's a copy:

 http://gist.github.com/368405


 On 4/16/10 8:05 AM, t...@uncon.org wrote:

 Quoting Istvan Köpeist...@advancetech.ro:

  
 there is a spamdyke-stats script, but me myself I would like to know how
 get it work/installed
  
 I think the last version is at:
 http://www.mail-archive.com/spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org/msg01885.html

 You can simply make it executable, and install it in your path.

 I log to syslog, so can simply do

 cat /var/log/maillog | spamdyke-stats
  



___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Istvan Köpe]

there is a spamdyke-stats script, but me myself I would like to know how 
get it work/installed

On 16.04.2010 01:02, nightduke wrote:
 how do you get those stats from spamdyke?

 Thanks


 2010/3/26t...@uncon.org:

 Quoting Eric Shuberte...@shubes.net:


  
 Wow, that's a bunch. How many domains?

 7 domains.

  
 As David's numbers show, if no pruning has ever been done, the % of old
 (inactive) entries is quite high (96.6% in his case). I suppose it's
 anyone's guess how many entries out of your 5M are still active.
 Needless to say, the script will run much faster once the initial prune
 completes.

 That's five million with graylist pruning set at three weeks.

  
 In your situation, I think I'd run the script in silent mode initially
 and just let it cook. Once it completes, I'd run it again with counts to
 see how many live entries there really are. My guess is that the 2nd run
 will complete in a reasonable period of time. If not, then it will be
 time to look at alternative solutions.

 I'm quite happy running with my graylist-weeks patch, which makes all
 this unnecessary.

  
 I've noticed that emails from lists are particularly troublesome for
 graylisting, as some for lists, each message comes from a different
 sender address (VERP). I wonder if spamdyke could be modified to ignore
 graylisting these messages, because graylisting them only has
 detrimental effects. This could perhaps help your situation as well.

 Yes, it's on SamC's TODO list. That doesn't really cause a problem for
 me, the level of list traffic against spam traffic is insignificant.
 Here's some stats:

   1062951   59.03%  DENIED_GRAYLISTED
565115   31.38%  DENIED_LOCAL_FROM_TO
1529108.49%  ALLOWED
 108260.60%  TIMEOUT
  61420.34%  DENIED_OTHER
  24620.13%  DENIED_TOO_MANY_RECIPIENTS
   2460.01%  ERROR

  Summary 
 Allowed:   1529108.49%
 Timeout:108260.60%
 Errors :  2460.01%
 Denied :  1636670   90.89%
 Total  :  1800652  100.00%


 Spamdyke is knocking out 90% of the mail that's trying to get in. Mailing 
 list
 traffic is a small proportion of the remaining 10%.

 (DENIED_LOCAL_FROM_TO is mail that is addressed both To and From a
 local user, which I also reject as that should never occur on this
 server.)

 Thanks,
 -trog

 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

  
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users



___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Dossy Shiobara]

mail-archive's wrapping of the code made it unusable via a plain
copy-and-paste, so I cleaned it up manually.  Here's a copy:

http://gist.github.com/368405


On 4/16/10 8:05 AM, t...@uncon.org wrote:
 Quoting Istvan Köpe ist...@advancetech.ro:
 
  there is a spamdyke-stats script, but me myself I would like to know how
  get it work/installed
 I think the last version is at:
 http://www.mail-archive.com/spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org/msg01885.html
 
 You can simply make it executable, and install it in your path.
 
 I log to syslog, so can simply do
 
 cat /var/log/maillog | spamdyke-stats


-- 
Dossy Shiobara  | do...@panoptic.com | http://dossy.org/
Panoptic Computer Network   | http://panoptic.com/
  He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on. (p. 70)
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[nightduke]

how do you get those stats from spamdyke?

Thanks


2010/3/26  t...@uncon.org:
 Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:



 Wow, that's a bunch. How many domains?

 7 domains.


 As David's numbers show, if no pruning has ever been done, the % of old
 (inactive) entries is quite high (96.6% in his case). I suppose it's
 anyone's guess how many entries out of your 5M are still active.
 Needless to say, the script will run much faster once the initial prune
 completes.

 That's five million with graylist pruning set at three weeks.


 In your situation, I think I'd run the script in silent mode initially
 and just let it cook. Once it completes, I'd run it again with counts to
 see how many live entries there really are. My guess is that the 2nd run
 will complete in a reasonable period of time. If not, then it will be
 time to look at alternative solutions.

 I'm quite happy running with my graylist-weeks patch, which makes all
 this unnecessary.


 I've noticed that emails from lists are particularly troublesome for
 graylisting, as some for lists, each message comes from a different
 sender address (VERP). I wonder if spamdyke could be modified to ignore
 graylisting these messages, because graylisting them only has
 detrimental effects. This could perhaps help your situation as well.

 Yes, it's on SamC's TODO list. That doesn't really cause a problem for
 me, the level of list traffic against spam traffic is insignificant.
 Here's some stats:

  1062951   59.03%  DENIED_GRAYLISTED
   565115   31.38%  DENIED_LOCAL_FROM_TO
   152910    8.49%  ALLOWED
    10826    0.60%  TIMEOUT
     6142    0.34%  DENIED_OTHER
     2462    0.13%  DENIED_TOO_MANY_RECIPIENTS
      246    0.01%  ERROR

  Summary 
 Allowed:   152910    8.49%
 Timeout:    10826    0.60%
 Errors :      246    0.01%
 Denied :  1636670   90.89%
 Total  :  1800652  100.00%


 Spamdyke is knocking out 90% of the mail that's trying to get in. Mailing list
 traffic is a small proportion of the remaining 10%.

 (DENIED_LOCAL_FROM_TO is mail that is addressed both To and From a
 local user, which I also reject as that should never occur on this
 server.)

 Thanks,
 -trog

 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Eric Shubert]

t...@uncon.org wrote:
 Here's some stats:
 
   1062951   59.03%  DENIED_GRAYLISTED
565115   31.38%  DENIED_LOCAL_FROM_TO
1529108.49%  ALLOWED
 108260.60%  TIMEOUT
  61420.34%  DENIED_OTHER
  24620.13%  DENIED_TOO_MANY_RECIPIENTS
   2460.01%  ERROR
 
  Summary 
 Allowed:   1529108.49%
 Timeout:108260.60%
 Errors :  2460.01%
 Denied :  1636670   90.89%
 Total  :  1800652  100.00%
 
 
 Spamdyke is knocking out 90% of the mail that's trying to get in. Mailing list
 traffic is a small proportion of the remaining 10%.
 
 (DENIED_LOCAL_FROM_TO is mail that is addressed both To and From a  
 local user, which I also reject as that should never occur on this  
 server.)
 

Thanks, Trog. That's interesting.

Not knowing how you're calculating the stats, I'm guessing that some 
portion of the ALLOWED messages are also included in the 
DENIED_GRAYLISTED figure, as one message will generate both log messages 
the first time through. The figures are a good ballpark though.

What's the time period for these stats?

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[trog]

Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:

 t...@uncon.org wrote:

 My mail servers graylisting was hitting filesystem limits in less than
 24 hours.

 Which limit(s) of which filesystem?

Number of directories within a directory, on ext3 (32k)

 The qtp-prune-graylist script would take much longer than a
 day to run on my mail server.

 Did you run it?
 In 'silent' mode?

That was just using find manually, rather than qtp-prune-graylist  
(which would take longer, as it does a second pass to delete empty  
directories



 How many graylist entries do you have?


Currently, around 5M, I've pruned it heavily recently. Have run out of  
inodes before now, which is 20M - that's on XFS now.

-trog


___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Eric Shubert]

David Milholen wrote:
 
 
 Eric Shubert wrote:
 t...@uncon.org wrote:
   
 Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:


 
 I think this is more complicated than it needs to be, and not any more
 efficient than the qtp-prune-graylist script
 (http://qtp.qmailtoaster.com/trac/browser/bin/qtp-prune-graylist). The
 script is admittedly a little i/o intensive, but a) some of it is
 typically cached, and b) it's not all that slow. Besides which, what's
 the problem? It's typically run once a day, and I don't see it impacting
 the performance of anything else.
   
 Depends on the scale of your mail server. See this entry from the ChangeLog:

   NOT BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE: Changed the graylist system to create a deeper
  directory structure by creating folders for the senders' domain  
 names.  This
  will allow busy servers to use graylisting even when the number of 
 sender
  addresses could exceed the number of entries allowed in a folder.  
 Thanks
  to Trog for suggesting this one.

 My mail servers graylisting was hitting filesystem limits in less than  
 24 hours.
 

 Which limit(s) of which filesystem?

   
 The qtp-prune-graylist script would take much longer than a  
 day to run on my mail server.
 

 Did you run it?
 In 'silent' mode?

 The first large server it ran on, it processed over 1.1M entries. I 
 don't recall the run time, but I believe it was less than an hour. This 
 was on a filesystem that had run out of inodes.

   
 I'd basically have to run it  
 continuously on my server - it would certainly impact performance.
 

 How many graylist entries do you have?

   
 Eric,
  Here are those results after using the script.. It was still running 
 after 10pm but it got the job done it looks like.
 qtp-prune-graylist processing graylist tree at /var/spamdyke/graylist ...
 qtp-prune-graylist pruning entries older than 1209600 seconds ...
 qtp-prune-graylist processing domain hhinc.net ...
 qtp-prune-graylist hhinc.net - 80118 entries found
 qtp-prune-graylist hhinc.net - 75815 entries removed
 qtp-prune-graylist hhinc.net - 56689 empty directories removed
 qtp-prune-graylist hhinc.net - 4314 graylisting entries remain
 qtp-prune-graylist processing domain test.com ...
 qtp-prune-graylist test.com - 1 entries found
 qtp-prune-graylist test.com - 1 entries removed
 qtp-prune-graylist test.com - 1 empty directories removed
 qtp-prune-graylist test.com - 0 graylisting entries remain
 qtp-prune-graylist processing domain wletc.com ...
 qtp-prune-graylist wletc.com - 1164192 entries found
 qtp-prune-graylist wletc.com - 1127660 entries removed
 qtp-prune-graylist wletc.com - 439585 empty directories removed
 qtp-prune-graylist wletc.com - 37315 graylisting entries remain
 qtp-prune-graylist processing domain localhost ...
 qtp-prune-graylist localhost - 0 entries found
 qtp-prune-graylist localhost - 0 entries removed
 qtp-prune-graylist localhost - 0 empty directories removed
 qtp-prune-graylist localhost - 0 graylisting entries remain
 qtp-prune-graylist total - 4 domains processed
 qtp-prune-graylist total - 1244311 entries found
 qtp-prune-graylist total - 1203476 entries removed
 qtp-prune-graylist total - 496275 empty directories removed
 qtp-prune-graylist total - 41629 graylisting entries remain
 
 The wletc domain is my largest domain.
  
 I am having trouble with a customer who was using smtp-auth to send a 
 1MB attachment and it is timing out.  Typically  only takes a few 
 seconds  and  its done  but this  is  the first  I have seen this.
  We are sending someone  to  check it  out  from  his end  to see whats up.
 Have any ideas on where I should check to see why its timing out. 
 Sometimes they will send but its taking a long time around 8mins or more.
 
 --Dave
 
 

Interesting numbers, Dave. Thanks for sharing.

How long does the script take to run now that the initial pruning is done?

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Eric Shubert]

David Milholen wrote:
  I just a need a little primer to understand which method of graylisting 
 i need to use.
 I have it set to always and those domain folders have are huge with 
 entries.
  I am configuring a new server with qtp using centos5.4. All of the 
 installation went smooth.
 I am thinking of using dovecot instead of courier on this one.
 I just dont want those huge graylist entries lingering around.
  If the sender in not on my domain and has no rdns or ip then they need 
 to be graylisted.
 --Dave

As far as senders in your domain go, if you have them use port 587 
(submission) they will not be subject to spamdyke at all. That's perhaps 
the simplest (and recommended) way to handle submissions.

As for cleaning up graylist entries, there's a qtp-prune-graylist script 
in QTP that does this for you. It may not be in the QTP RPM yet, as I 
don't think we've cut a QTP release since it was added. You can download 
and run it from the QTP subversion repo though. It's self contained and 
has no dependent (sub)scripts.

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Eric Shubert]

t...@uncon.org wrote:
 Quoting David Milholen dmilho...@wletc.com:
 
  I just a need a little primer to understand which method of graylisting
 i need to use.
 
 I just dont want those huge graylist entries lingering around.
 
 Graylist pruning has always been a problem with spamdyke. You have a  
 few options:
 
 1. Use 'find' to delete old entries, as detailed in the FAQ.
Problems: I/O Intensive, very slow
 
 2. Delete your whole graylist history and start again.
Problems: (usually) I/O Intensive, slow, lose graylist history
 
 3. Use a loopback filesystem to host your graylist directory, and  
 umount/format it to clear history
Problems: lose graylist history, requires manual intervention  
 (unless you don't mind formatting filesystems from a script)
 
 4. There is a mysql patch (I believe), haven't tested it.
 
 I quickly moved from doing option 1 to option 3, but I got a bit bored  
 with doing that after a while, so started thinking of alternative  
 schemes that don't require a spamdyke daemon to be running.
 
 I finally came up with the following answer: add a new option to  
 spamdyke (graylist-weeks) and rotate the graylist directories on a  
 weekly basis, with automatic migration, so that old entries  
 automatically age.
 
 So if you have graylist-weeks=3, you end up with a directory structure like:
 
 graylist_dir/my.do.main/201009
 graylist_dir/my.do.main/201010
 graylist_dir/my.do.main/201011   -- current week dir
 
 all three of these directories will be checked for entries, and if  
 found, migrated to the current week directory if required. On the  
 fourth week you'll get a structure like:
 
 graylist_dir/my.do.main/201009   -- expired entries
 graylist_dir/my.do.main/201010
 graylist_dir/my.do.main/201011
 graylist_dir/my.do.main/201012   -- current week dir
 
 You can then simply delete the whole directory containing the expired  
 entries. I wrote a small program that prints out the directories that  
 need to be removed, which can be fed to rm with xargs.
 
 If anyone's interested, I can post the patch.
 
 Thanks,
 -trog

I think this is more complicated than it needs to be, and not any more 
efficient than the qtp-prune-graylist script 
(http://qtp.qmailtoaster.com/trac/browser/bin/qtp-prune-graylist). The 
script is admittedly a little i/o intensive, but a) some of it is 
typically cached, and b) it's not all that slow. Besides which, what's 
the problem? It's typically run once a day, and I don't see it impacting 
the performance of anything else.

To each his own though.
-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[trog]

Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:


 I think this is more complicated than it needs to be, and not any more
 efficient than the qtp-prune-graylist script
 (http://qtp.qmailtoaster.com/trac/browser/bin/qtp-prune-graylist). The
 script is admittedly a little i/o intensive, but a) some of it is
 typically cached, and b) it's not all that slow. Besides which, what's
 the problem? It's typically run once a day, and I don't see it impacting
 the performance of anything else.

Depends on the scale of your mail server. See this entry from the ChangeLog:

  NOT BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE: Changed the graylist system to create a deeper
 directory structure by creating folders for the senders' domain  
names.  This
 will allow busy servers to use graylisting even when the number of sender
 addresses could exceed the number of entries allowed in a folder.  Thanks
 to Trog for suggesting this one.

My mail servers graylisting was hitting filesystem limits in less than  
24 hours. The qtp-prune-graylist script would take much longer than a  
day to run on my mail server. I'd basically have to run it  
continuously on my server - it would certainly impact performance.

Regards,
-trog

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Eric Shubert]

t...@uncon.org wrote:
 Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:
 
 
 I think this is more complicated than it needs to be, and not any more
 efficient than the qtp-prune-graylist script
 (http://qtp.qmailtoaster.com/trac/browser/bin/qtp-prune-graylist). The
 script is admittedly a little i/o intensive, but a) some of it is
 typically cached, and b) it's not all that slow. Besides which, what's
 the problem? It's typically run once a day, and I don't see it impacting
 the performance of anything else.
 
 Depends on the scale of your mail server. See this entry from the ChangeLog:
 
   NOT BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE: Changed the graylist system to create a deeper
  directory structure by creating folders for the senders' domain  
 names.  This
  will allow busy servers to use graylisting even when the number of sender
  addresses could exceed the number of entries allowed in a folder.  Thanks
  to Trog for suggesting this one.
 
 My mail servers graylisting was hitting filesystem limits in less than  
 24 hours.

Which limit(s) of which filesystem?

 The qtp-prune-graylist script would take much longer than a  
 day to run on my mail server.

Did you run it?
In 'silent' mode?

The first large server it ran on, it processed over 1.1M entries. I 
don't recall the run time, but I believe it was less than an hour. This 
was on a filesystem that had run out of inodes.

 I'd basically have to run it  
 continuously on my server - it would certainly impact performance.

How many graylist entries do you have?

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting and attachment failures

[Greg Cirino]

|
| Which end is timing out the connection? You can use spamdyke's excellent
| detailed logging to find out. My guess is that the session times out
| before spam/virus scanning is complete. If that's the case, either tune
| up your scanning if possible (put working directory in tmpfs?) or
| increase your timeout setting to be greater than the longest scan times
| you're seeing.
|
| --
| -Eric 'shubes'


as a followup, I looked at the setup, virus scanning is done by simscan
which I believe is done before the hand off to spamdyke, I may be wrong,
but any bounces due to virus detection never get logged by spamdyke as an
attempted connection from what I can tell, and spam filtering is done
after spamdyke hands off the email to qmail, so I'm not sure the time
setting of timeout is affecting this.  This issue also happened when the
timeout setting was set at 10 minutes.

greg

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting and attachment failures

[Eric Shubert]

Greg Cirino wrote:
 |
 | Which end is timing out the connection? You can use spamdyke's excellent
 | detailed logging to find out. My guess is that the session times out
 | before spam/virus scanning is complete. If that's the case, either tune
 | up your scanning if possible (put working directory in tmpfs?) or
 | increase your timeout setting to be greater than the longest scan times
 | you're seeing.
 |
 | --
 | -Eric 'shubes'
 
 
 as a followup, I looked at the setup, virus scanning is done by simscan
 which I believe is done before the hand off to spamdyke, I may be wrong,

Yes, you are. spamdyke is at the forefront. It's:
spamdyke - qmail-smtp - simscan - spamassassin

 but any bounces due to virus detection never get logged by spamdyke as an
 attempted connection from what I can tell,

All smtp sessions are logged by spamdyke ttbomk. I believe that 
rejections from spamassassin/simscan show as DENIED_OTHER. Technically 
these are rejections, not bounces. Bounces are messages created by a 
mail server after having accepted an email. In the case of spamdyke 
rejections, messages are never accepted so there is never a bounce 
coming from spamdyke. The bounce would come from the sending server back 
to the user.

 and spam filtering is done
 after spamdyke hands off the email to qmail, so I'm not sure the time
 setting of timeout is affecting this.  This issue also happened when the
 timeout setting was set at 10 minutes.

This would seem to indicate that the sending server is timing out, and 
not spamdyke.

You should be aware that the smtp session remains active/open while the 
message is scanned. spamdyke isn't finished with a message until it's 
been processed by simscan and spamassassin. This the period during which 
the sending server *might* be timing out, which would be why the 
spamdyke timeout setting is having no effect.

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] graylisting and attachment failures

[Greg Cirino]

Hello,

Has anybody experienced issues when graylisting a domain and timeouts with
attachments (PDF files in my case)

Here is the scenario,

Remote users sends an email to a local domain user with a pdf attachment

The graylisting kicks in (normal)

After the initial graylist time, the user is allowed, but the email times
out.

I've seen this before from multiple remote sources using qmail and
sendmail servers.

This happens with and without tls, so I'm not sure it's a tls issue,
though I may be wrong.

The log seems to indicate the connection is allowed, and the timestamp on
the timeout log entry is exactly the number of seconds of the idle-timeout
setting.

Not sure if the communication is breaking down or what.

Any ideas or experiences?

best
greg


___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting and attachment failures

[Eric Shubert]

Greg Cirino wrote:
 Hello,
 
 Has anybody experienced issues when graylisting a domain and timeouts with
 attachments (PDF files in my case)
 
 Here is the scenario,
 
 Remote users sends an email to a local domain user with a pdf attachment
 
 The graylisting kicks in (normal)
 
 After the initial graylist time, the user is allowed, but the email times
 out.
 
 I've seen this before from multiple remote sources using qmail and
 sendmail servers.
 
 This happens with and without tls, so I'm not sure it's a tls issue,
 though I may be wrong.
 
 The log seems to indicate the connection is allowed, and the timestamp on
 the timeout log entry is exactly the number of seconds of the idle-timeout
 setting.
 
 Not sure if the communication is breaking down or what.
 
 Any ideas or experiences?
 
 best
 greg

Which end is timing out the connection? You can use spamdyke's excellent 
detailed logging to find out. My guess is that the session times out 
before spam/virus scanning is complete. If that's the case, either tune 
up your scanning if possible (put working directory in tmpfs?) or 
increase your timeout setting to be greater than the longest scan times 
you're seeing.

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting and attachment failures

[Greg Cirino]

|
| Which end is timing out the connection? You can use spamdyke's excellent
| detailed logging to find out. My guess is that the session times out
| before spam/virus scanning is complete. If that's the case, either tune
| up your scanning if possible (put working directory in tmpfs?) or
| increase your timeout setting to be greater than the longest scan times
| you're seeing.
|
| --
| -Eric 'shubes'
|

thanx will try that

best
greg

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] graylisting timeout problems

[Marcin Orlowski]

Hi,

I use spamdyke 3 and got graylisting enabled. My expiration
time of graylisting token is set to one week. However,
despite continous mail exchange between two email addresses
I still see graylisting to take place. What I used to believe
was that once user A sent mail to B, then A's server retried
once graylisted the token spamdyke created for that pair
is valid for one week. But I also believed that on each new
delivery from A to B this token is touch'ed, so my cron invoked
clean up script would remove all tokens older than one week
while older than one week means that there was no mails from
A to B for a week, not one week since graylisted.
Anyone could please confirm my findings? If I am right, does
spamdyke 4 fixes that issue?

Regards,
-- 
Daddy, what does 'Formatting drive C:' mean?...

Marcin http://wfmh.org.pl/carlos/
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting question

[slamp slamp]

On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Sam Clippinger s...@silence.org wrote:
 Invalid recipients are not rejected by qmail at all; qmail accepts
 messages for any user and later bounces them if the recipient doesn't
 exist.  This makes qmail a prolific source of backscatter spam.

 Even if qmail did reject invalid recipients, however, spamdyke wouldn't
 be able to use its return code.  This is because the graylisting
 rejection must take place before the recipient address is sent to
 qmail.  Once a recipient address has been added to a message, there is
 no way to remove it without closing and restarting the connection.

 I've been working on adding recipient validation to spamdyke and it's
 basically done.  I'm currently fixing some other bugs and testing the
 new features.

 -- Sam Clippinger


thanks for the clarification Sam, i cant wait for the new features!
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] graylisting domains

[nightduke]

Hi i wish to know if it's possible to add a domain at graylisting
directory, if it's added every email from that domain will be
automactly added and people start receiving emails from that domain.

I hope people can understand what i'm saying.

Nightduke
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting domains

[David Stiller]

nightduke schrieb:
 Hi i wish to know if it's possible to add a domain at graylisting
 directory, if it's added every email from that domain will be
 automactly added and people start receiving emails from that domain.

 I hope people can understand what i'm saying.

 Nightduke
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
   
First of all, if you add a domain in the greylisting directory,
the greylisting for the domain is just activated and every incoming
mail will be denied temporarily.

What do you mean by automatically adding emails to it? Spamdyke does
it, as soon a mail comes in for that recipient.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting - how effective it really is?

[Ken Schweigert]

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 8:24 AM, Marcin Orlowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hi,

 I wonder if anyone tried to analyze his logs to find out how
 effective gray listing is. I'd probably prefer to allow all
 incoming mails (maybe with exceptions) and even disable
 DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS blockers as it yet causes too much
 collateral damages I can accept, even 99% of the mails
 DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS deny is spam, then I got still 1%
 remaining - and this ususally causes some problems, but
 I yet like to deny mass-flood-senders. Something which
 graylisting still shall fight with. So - graylisting -
 how effective it really is for you?


When I used the graylisting feature, it was very effective for us.
However, we got some collateral damage from mail servers who weren't
behaving properly; specifically AOL.  When an AOL user would send for
the first time the server would return the try again in a few
minutes message back to AOL's mail server, but instead of actually
trying again, AOL would just pass that message back to the user.  Then
we would get a call from the user saying they couldn't send us email.
This happened with another ISP (can't remember who now) as well.
After a dozen calls it just wasn't worth having graylisting enabled.
But that's just my experience.

-- 
Have a nice day ... unless you've made other plans.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting - how effective it really is?

[Jake Briggs]

The stats we have here (small 40 person company) are pretty much evenly 
split between greylisting, early talkers and realtime blacklists :D


Marcin Orlowski wrote:
 Hi,

 I wonder if anyone tried to analyze his logs to find out how
 effective gray listing is. I'd probably prefer to allow all
 incoming mails (maybe with exceptions) and even disable
 DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS blockers as it yet causes too much
 collateral damages I can accept, even 99% of the mails
 DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS deny is spam, then I got still 1%
 remaining - and this ususally causes some problems, but
 I yet like to deny mass-flood-senders. Something which
 graylisting still shall fight with. So - graylisting -
 how effective it really is for you?


 Regards,
   

-- 
Jacob Briggs
Systems Engineer

Core Technology Limited
Level 1, NZX Centre
11 Cable Street
Wellington
Phone +64 4 801 2252

--

Private Object doAnythingConceivable(String whatToDo, Object whatToDoItWith) { 
.


___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] Graylisting - how effective it really is?

[Marcin Orlowski]

Hi,

I wonder if anyone tried to analyze his logs to find out how
effective gray listing is. I'd probably prefer to allow all
incoming mails (maybe with exceptions) and even disable
DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS blockers as it yet causes too much
collateral damages I can accept, even 99% of the mails
DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS deny is spam, then I got still 1%
remaining - and this ususally causes some problems, but
I yet like to deny mass-flood-senders. Something which
graylisting still shall fight with. So - graylisting -
how effective it really is for you?


Regards,
-- 
Daddy, what Formatting drive C: means?...

Marcinhttp://wfmh.org.pl/carlos/
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting - how effective it really is?

[Andras Korn]

On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 02:24:47PM +0200, Marcin Orlowski wrote:

Hi,

 I wonder if anyone tried to analyze his logs to find out how effective
 gray listing is. I'd probably prefer to allow all incoming mails (maybe
 with exceptions) and even disable DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS blockers as it yet
 causes too much collateral damages I can accept, even 99% of the mails
 DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS deny is spam, then I got still 1% remaining - and
 this ususally causes some problems, but I yet like to deny
 mass-flood-senders. Something which graylisting still shall fight with. So
 - graylisting - how effective it really is for you?

I don't use spamdyke's graylisting; when I started using spamdyke, I already
had a similar, albeit less powerful solution based on tcpsvd and some
scripting. It only takes the IP of the client into account, not the sender
or the recipient address.

Based on some munin graphs, it appears that about 1/3 of all connecting IPs
are blocked by even this primitive graylist.

Andras

-- 
 Andras Korn korn at chardonnay.math.bme.hu
 http://chardonnay.math.bme.hu/~korn/ QOTD:
   A single fact can spoil a good argument.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting - how effective it really is?

[dnk]

When i first installed spamdyke, I used only greylisting. No other
blocks with it.

Prior to spamdyke: 40-60 spams a day (my personal account)
Post spamdyke: 2 in 6+ months.


Now of course your millage may vary based on how you use your account,
server setup, etc. But for me on a personal note, it was VERY VERY
effective.

DNK

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 5:37 AM, Andras Korn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 02:24:47PM +0200, Marcin Orlowski wrote:

 Hi,

 I wonder if anyone tried to analyze his logs to find out how effective
 gray listing is. I'd probably prefer to allow all incoming mails (maybe
 with exceptions) and even disable DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS blockers as it yet
 causes too much collateral damages I can accept, even 99% of the mails
 DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS deny is spam, then I got still 1% remaining - and
 this ususally causes some problems, but I yet like to deny
 mass-flood-senders. Something which graylisting still shall fight with. So
 - graylisting - how effective it really is for you?

 I don't use spamdyke's graylisting; when I started using spamdyke, I already
 had a similar, albeit less powerful solution based on tcpsvd and some
 scripting. It only takes the IP of the client into account, not the sender
 or the recipient address.

 Based on some munin graphs, it appears that about 1/3 of all connecting IPs
 are blocked by even this primitive graylist.

 Andras

 --
 Andras Korn korn at chardonnay.math.bme.hu
 http://chardonnay.math.bme.hu/~korn/ QOTD:
   A single fact can spoil a good argument.
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting - how effective it really, is?

[BC]

On 5/9/2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  So - graylisting - how effective it really is for you?

The only spam blocking I use presently is spamdyke with graylisting.

Pre-spamdyke I was getting 1000 spams/day into my personal mailbox.

Since installing spamdyke with graylisting I get 3-4 spams/day.

Bucky

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting - how effective it really, is?

[Dallas Crandall]

Two days ago I deleted 68,134 spam with spamdyke (without gray listing) and
I received about 15-20 spam to my inbox.
Today I have spamdyke with graylisting and we have deleted  nearly 80,000
spam and I have received 0 spam so far. :)

Dallas Crandall
Backup's Plus Computer Services
208-841-5519


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of BC
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 11:09 AM
To: spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
Subject: Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting - how effective it really, is?


On 5/9/2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  So - graylisting - how effective it really is for you?

The only spam blocking I use presently is spamdyke with graylisting.

Pre-spamdyke I was getting 1000 spams/day into my personal mailbox.

Since installing spamdyke with graylisting I get 3-4 spams/day.

Bucky

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting-- what am I doing wrong?

[Andrew Liles]

The classic gotcha is not giving the user under which Spamdyke runs 
permission to create directories in the graylist folder.

Spamdyke can check this, and other things, itself: follow instructions 
for the unit test here:
http://www.spamdyke.org/documentation/README.html#CONFIGURATION_TEST

Ben Mills wrote:
 First , Spamdyke is great. But I have one problem. I can't get 
 graylisting to work.

 In the config I have Graylisting and the path. The min and max limits 
 are set up. The graylist dir was made, and the dirs for the domains I 
 wish to graylist are sub-dirs of the graylist dir.

 What did I do wrong?

 Ben

 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
   

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting-- what am I doing wrong?

[Ben Mills]

Andrew Liles wrote:
 The classic gotcha is not giving the user under which Spamdyke runs 
 permission to create directories in the graylist folder.

You were right. For some reason I couldn't get the config test to work, 
but I changed the ownership from root and graylisting started working 
just fine.

Best regards,
Ben
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[night duke]

Here's the information o fmy spamdyke.conf

cat spamdyke.conf
log-level=3
local-domains-file=/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
max-recipients=10
idle-timeout-secs=60
policy-url= http://www.spamhaus.org/
ip-whitelist-file=/var/qmail/spamdyke/whitelist_ip
greeting-delay-secs=5
check-dnsrbl=zombie.dnsbl.sorbs.net
check-dnsrbl=dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net
check-dnsrbl=bogons.cymru.com
reject-missing-sender-mx
tls-certificate-file=/var/qmail/control/servercert.pem policy-url= 
http://www.spamhaus.org/
ip-whitelist-file=/var/qmail/spamdyke/whitelist_ip
greeting-delay-secs=5
check-dnsrbl=zombie.dnsbl.sorbs.net
check-dnsrbl=dnsbl.sorbs.net
check-dnsrbl=bogons.cymru.com
check-dnsrbl=zen.spamhaus.org
check-dnsrbl=bl.spamcop.net
check-dnsrbl=cbl.abuseat.org
check-dnsrbl=dnsbl-3.uceprotect.net
check-dnsrbl=sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org
check-dnsrbl=list.dsbl.org
tls-certificate-file=/var/qmail/control/servercert.pem
reject-missing-sender-mx
idle-timeout-secs=300
graylist-dir=/var/qmail/graylist
graylist-max-secs=1814400
graylist-min-secs=300
sender-blacklist-file=/var/qmail/spamdyke/blacklist_senders

I have not added at /var/qmail/graylist gmail.com but i still receiving emails 
from gmail.

What' i'm doing wrong?
I wish to know if the graylisting it's working.

Thanks a lot

Nightduke

- Mensaje original 
De: night duke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Para: spamdyke users spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado: lunes, 5 de noviembre, 2007 16:47:41
Asunto: Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

Thanks a lot for the information.

Nightduke

Sam Clippinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: To activate graylisting:
   1) Create a top-level folder, like /var/qmail/graylisting
   2) Create one folder for each domain _you_host_.  On my server, I 
created /var/qmail/graylisting/silence.org.  On your server, you don't 
host silence.org, so you will use your own domain name(s).
   3) Configure spamdyke to use the folder by updating the configuration 
file with: graylist-dir=/var/qmail/graylisting
   4) Done.

-- Sam Clippinger

night duke wrote:
 If i don't add the domanin  manually it's a problem to me.
 Can not be automactly added?
 
 Thanks
 
 Nightduke
 
 
 
 
 */davide bozzelli /* escribió:

 
 night duke ha scritto:
   So i must add only my domains there.I must add the domains from
 where
   i want to receive?
  
 Yes, more precisely the domain(s) you want to enable graylist for.
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
 
 
 
 
 Sé un Mejor Amante del Cine
 ¿Quieres saber cómo? ¡Deja que otras personas te ayuden! 
 .
 
 
 
 

 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

 


  

¡Descubre una nueva forma de obtener respuestas a tus preguntas!
Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas.






   
__ 
Pregunta, Responde, Descubre. 
Comparte tus consejos y opiniones con los usuarios de Yahoo! Respuestas 
http://es.answers.yahoo.com/info/welcome___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Davide Bozzelli]

night duke ha scritto:


 I have not added at /var/qmail/graylist gmail.com but i still 
 receiving emails from gmail.

Well .. i think you have some problems to understand at least my poor 
english  :)

I'll try to re-explain all the stuff ...

The domain you must add it's not the source domain , but YOUR domain, eg 
the domain you would like receive mails for .

If i'm [EMAIL PROTECTED] and i send and email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , and 
domain.com is hosted on the server running spamdyke,
you must not add gmail.com to the graylist dir , but domain.com  .

The fact you add your local domain in the graylist dir is to decide on 
witch domains apply the graylist .
So you could have, for example domain1.com that get graylisted if you 
add it in the graylist dir, and domain2.com which is not graylisted
if you don't add it in the graylist dir .

So: THE DOMAIN YOU MUST ADD IN THE GRAYLIST DIR IS YOUR DOMAIN, NOT THE 
REMOTE DOMAIN.

i'll hope you finally understand the point :)

Have fun,
Davide
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[night duke]

So i must add only the domain that are on my hosting machine, those domains 
that are using spamdyke?
I think graylisting was i must add a directory the domain from where i wan't 
receive.
I was wrong?

Thanks a lot.

Nightduke


- Mensaje original 
De: Davide Bozzelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Para: spamdyke users spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
Enviado: lunes, 12 de noviembre, 2007 16:21:12
Asunto: Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

night duke ha scritto:


 I have not added at /var/qmail/graylist gmail.com but i still 
 receiving emails from gmail.

Well .. i think you have some problems to understand at least my poor 
english  :)

I'll try to re-explain all the stuff ...

The domain you must add it's not the source domain , but YOUR domain,
 eg 
the domain you would like receive mails for .

If i'm [EMAIL PROTECTED] and i send and email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , and
 
domain.com is hosted on the server running spamdyke,
you must not add gmail.com to the graylist dir , but domain.com  .

The fact you add your local domain in the graylist dir is to decide on 
witch domains apply the graylist .
So you could have, for example domain1.com that get graylisted if you 
add it in the graylist dir, and domain2.com which is not graylisted
if you don't add it in the graylist dir .

So: THE DOMAIN YOU MUST ADD IN THE GRAYLIST DIR IS YOUR DOMAIN, NOT THE
 
REMOTE DOMAIN.

i'll hope you finally understand the point :)

Have fun,
Davide
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users






   
__ 
Pregunta, Responde, Descubre. 
Comparte tus consejos y opiniones con los usuarios de Yahoo! Respuestas 
http://es.answers.yahoo.com/info/welcome___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[night duke]

Sorry i'm a little bit lost with graylisting...

I must add manually the domains from where i want to receive emails from?

Thanks a lot

Nightduke

Filip Rembiałkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: 2007/10/4, davide bozzelli :
 night duke ha scritto:
  So i must add only my domains there.I must add the domains from where
  i want to receive?
 
 Yes, more precisely the domain(s) you want to enable graylist for.

hehe
Yes, more precisely, no.


-- 
Filip Rembiałkowski
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


   
-

¡Descubre una nueva forma de obtener respuestas a tus preguntas!
Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Filip Rembiałkowski]

2007/10/4, davide bozzelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 night duke ha scritto:
  So i must add only my domains there.I must add the domains from where
  i want to receive?
 
 Yes, more precisely the domain(s) you want to enable graylist for.

hehe
Yes, more precisely, no.


-- 
Filip Rembiałkowski
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[night duke]

So i must add only my domains there.I must add the domains from where i want to 
receive?

NIghtduke


BC [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: 
On 10/3/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Ok but i must add a directory on /var/qmail/spamdyke/graylisted/
 Like  gmail.com
 It's not done automactly?I must do with all the domains i want
 receive emails from?


You tell spamdyke the DOMAIN for which the greylisting will occur.

For example, I have spamdyke look in my /var/qmail/antispam/graylist/
directory for my mail DOMAIN, which in my case is called purgatoire.org.

So when I'm done adding the DOMAIN as a directory name, spamdyke is using:

/var/qmail/antispam/graylist/purgatoire.org/

to create and read other directories and file.

In addition, be sure that spamdyke has permission to read/write the
../graylist/purgatoire.org/ directory or graylisting will fail.  In my
case, spamdyke operates as qmaild:wheel for permissions.  If that
doesn't work for you, then temporarily tell spamdyke to write to the
/tmp directory and see what permission it sets up for itself.

Bucky

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


   
-

Sé un Mejor Amante del Cine
¿Quieres saber cómo? ¡Deja que otras personas te ayuden!.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[davide bozzelli]

night duke ha scritto:
 So i must add only my domains there.I must add the domains from where 
 i want to receive?

Yes, more precisely the domain(s) you want to enable graylist for.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[night duke]

If i don't add the domanin  manually it's a problem to me.
Can not be automactly added?

Thanks

Nightduke




davide bozzelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: night duke ha scritto:
 So i must add only my domains there.I must add the domains from where 
 i want to receive?

Yes, more precisely the domain(s) you want to enable graylist for.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


   
-

Sé un Mejor Amante del Cine
¿Quieres saber cómo? ¡Deja que otras personas te ayuden!.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Sam Clippinger]

To activate graylisting:
   1) Create a top-level folder, like /var/qmail/graylisting
   2) Create one folder for each domain _you_host_.  On my server, I 
created /var/qmail/graylisting/silence.org.  On your server, you don't 
host silence.org, so you will use your own domain name(s).
   3) Configure spamdyke to use the folder by updating the configuration 
file with: graylist-dir=/var/qmail/graylisting
   4) Done.

-- Sam Clippinger

night duke wrote:
 If i don't add the domanin  manually it's a problem to me.
 Can not be automactly added?
 
 Thanks
 
 Nightduke
 
 
 
 
 */davide bozzelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* escribió:
 
 night duke ha scritto:
   So i must add only my domains there.I must add the domains from
 where
   i want to receive?
  
 Yes, more precisely the domain(s) you want to enable graylist for.
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
 
 
 
 
 Sé un Mejor Amante del Cine
 ¿Quieres saber cómo? ¡Deja que otras personas te ayuden! 
 http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/es/tagline/beabetter/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/reto/entretenimiento.html.
 
 
 
 
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[Filip Rembiałkowski]

2007/10/3, night duke [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Ok but i must add a directory on /var/qmail/spamdyke/graylisted/
 Like  gmail.com
 It's not done automactly?I must do with all the domains i want receive
 emails from?

you must create a subdirectory for each domain you RECEIVE emails.

F.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[davide bozzelli]

night duke ha scritto:
 Ok but i must add a directory on /var/qmail/spamdyke/graylisted/
 Like  gmail.com
 It's not done automactly?I must do with all the domains i want receive 
 emails from?

 Thanks

 Nightduke


I think you have'nt read the docs at all .

You should create a folder for you LOCAL domain, NOT for the sender 
domains .

Cheers,
Davide
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting

[BC]

On 10/3/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Ok but i must add a directory on /var/qmail/spamdyke/graylisted/
 Like  gmail.com
 It's not done automactly?I must do with all the domains i want
 receive emails from?


You tell spamdyke the DOMAIN for which the greylisting will occur.

For example, I have spamdyke look in my /var/qmail/antispam/graylist/
directory for my mail DOMAIN, which in my case is called purgatoire.org.

So when I'm done adding the DOMAIN as a directory name, spamdyke is using:

/var/qmail/antispam/graylist/purgatoire.org/

to create and read other directories and file.

In addition, be sure that spamdyke has permission to read/write the
../graylist/purgatoire.org/ directory or graylisting will fail.  In my
case, spamdyke operates as qmaild:wheel for permissions.  If that
doesn't work for you, then temporarily tell spamdyke to write to the
/tmp directory and see what permission it sets up for itself.

Bucky

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylisting not working (Autofs/NFS?)

[Paulo Henrique]

I have this problem in local partition (xfs), see the same messages:

INFO(graylist-dir): Testing graylist directory:
/var/cache/graylist/DOMAIN.COM.BR
ERROR(graylist-dir): Found non-regular file in graylist folder where

Note: error in /var/cache/graylist/DOMAIN.COM.BR, not in /var/cache/graylist.

But graylist work fine
I Have other system with NFS and work fine, without errors.

tks.

2007/10/1, Richard Kreider [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Hello all,

 Not 100% sure if autofs has to do with this problem I'm having or not.
 First, the output:

 INFO(graylist-dir): Testing graylist directory: /var/qmail/greylist
 ERROR(graylist-dir): Found non-regular file in graylist folder where
 only domain directories should be: /var/qmail/greylist/.
 ERROR(graylist-dir): Found non-regular file in graylist folder where
 only domain directories should be: /var/qmail/greylist/..
 ERROR(graylist-dir): Found non-regular file in graylist folder where
 only domain directories should be: /var/qmail/greylist/test.com

 ERROR: Tests complete. Errors detected.

 Second, I have setup /var/qmail/greylist to be the storage point for the
 greylist information...

 Third, if I create a directoy in /tmp such as /tmp/test and
 create /tmp/test/test.com then run the config-test against this path for
 greylisting, it succeeds.

 /var/qmail/greylist points to /var/autofs/net/greylist

 Is there something obvious to anyone else about this setup?  I'm sure I
 either missed something or I broke something. =/

 Debian GNU/Linux 2.4.26 / spamdyke 3.0.1 / qmail from source

 Thanks in advance,

 Rich

 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users





-- 
Paulo Henrique Fonseca
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

[spamdyke-users] graylisting

[night duke]

Hi i'm a little bit lost.Can anyone tell me what must have 
/var/qmail/graylisting directory.
  I must add there a file with the domains i want to receive emails from?.
   
  Thanks.
   
  Nightduke
   

   
-

Sé un Mejor Amante del Cine
¿Quieres saber cómo? ¡Deja que otras personas te ayuden!.
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Re: [spamdyke-users] graylisting without vpopmail

[davide bozzelli]

night duke ha scritto:
 Hi i wish to know if i can use graylisting with spamdyke i don't have 
 vpopmail.
 It's possible?
  
Vpopmail is simply a user manager tool aka virtual user tool for qmail .

Spamdyke does not speak at all with  vpopmail for graylist.

So the answer is: yes, you can, because spamdyke is dependent from 
vpopmail ONLY if you plan to use the smtp-auth feature of spamdyke with 
vpopmail .

Have fun,
Davide
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users