Daniel L. Miller wrote:
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
In the newest built is an
Response Delay After Greeting
The number of seconds ASSP will wait to answer a banner greeting . No
delay is imposed if the field is left blank or set to 0.
(10 seconds is max for security)
Please try
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
In the newest built is an
Response Delay After Greeting
The number of seconds ASSP will wait to answer a banner greeting . No
delay is imposed if the field is left blank or set to 0.
(10 seconds is max for security)
Please try it.
What log entries do I
It had the bypass for nodelay (and more bypasses) from the
beginning.
fritz
That's great, but I have the impression (can't tell for sure) that I'm not
receiving all mail. Assp interface often get totally unresponsive and it
looks like a lot of mail isn't simply passing thru it. I tell you,
Does ASSP check for packets received during the delay period (before the 220
command is sent)? If so, does it do anything to block the offender when it
tries again?
Marrco wrote:
I'm anxious to try this in ASSP. I've used Response Delays with
other software and found it very effective. But
Does ASSP check for packets received during the delay period (before
the 220
command is sent)? If so, does it do anything to block the offender
when it
tries again?
I answered that already twice.
fritz
-
This SF.net
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
Does ASSP check for packets received during the delay period (before
the 220
command is sent)? If so, does it do anything to block the offender
when it
tries again?
I answered that already twice.
I saw this response from you in an earlier message:
That's not what I was asking. I was asking if the offending address
went
into the blacklist, graylist, or other blocking mechanism.
No.
fritz
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
That's not what I was asking. I was asking if the offending address
went
into the blacklist, graylist, or other blocking mechanism.
No.
fritz
Would it not be better if addresses that disregard the greeting delay time
could add to the PB score, be blacklisted for
Would it not be better
No.
fritz
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
That's not what I was asking. I was asking if the offending address
went
into the blacklist, graylist, or other blocking mechanism.
No.
Is the problem with seeing packets received during the delay period (before
the 220 command is sent) the fact that single-threaded ASSP *can't* see if
Please try it.
Huge load on my server. I lowered to 3 seconds, but still heavy load. I fear
I could not resist a dictionary attack or some large spam storm, so I turned
that off
Strange, i did see the huge load on the first implementation, but
with the new version i do not get high
Strange, i did see the huge load on the first implementation, but
with the new version i do not get high loads (tested it on linux and
win)
ASSP will accept *more* connections in the same timeframe and it may
be wise to set maxconnections to 64 or 96.
Nevertheless the statistics should show a
A few consideration :
since we already have the connecting IP address we could skip the check for
known good hosts, that is :
IP addresses in nodelay.txt, ipwl.txt and ipnp.txt
And (optional, I'm not sure if it makes sense or that's a plain wrong idea)
skip also for :
-) PB autowhitebox (don't
Director
Matagorda County
Date: Sunday, May 20 2007 6:42
Subject: [Assp-user] Response Delay After Greeting
In the newest built is an
Response Delay After Greeting
The number of seconds ASSP will wait to answer a banner greeting . No
delay is imposed if the field is left blank or set to 0
I'm anxious to try this in ASSP. I've used Response Delays with other
software and
found it very effective. But I've used much longer delays (up to 40
seconds) and
I've also used delays after every command. One feature that I've found
works very well and helps to reduce the amount of time
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
I suggested a few
hours ago to bypass nodelay.txt, ipwl.txt and ipnp.txt (and maybe
more), and
.51 has a bypass for nodelay.
It had the bypass for nodelay (and more bypasses) from the
In the newest built is an
Response Delay After Greeting
The number of seconds ASSP will wait to answer a banner greeting . No
delay is imposed if the field is left blank or set to 0.
(10 seconds is max for security)
Please try it.
in the newest built is an
Response Delay After Greeting
The number of seconds ASSP will wait to answer a banner greeting . No
delay is imposed if the field is left blank or set to 0.
(10 seconds is max for security)
Please try it.
Still getting
$modversion='(49)'; #appended in
Hi Fritz,
If i put = 10 then the function is discarded.
Is the implementation different from the testing delay which was in
other versions before ?
Is it possible to disconnect immediatly when someone send data when the
delay is in progress ?
Fritz Borgstedt schreef:
In the newest built is
Hi Fritz,
If i put = 10 then the function is discarded.
sorry max is 9.
Is the implementation different from the testing delay which was in
other versions before ?
yep, Wim and me are trying a different approach.
Is it possible to disconnect immediatly when someone send data when
the
If i put = 10 then the function is discarded.
sorry max is 9.
Ok, maybe it is better or endusers to use 10 when input = 10 ?
Is the implementation different from the testing delay which was in
other versions before ?
yep, Wim and me are trying a different approach.
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
In the newest built is an
Response Delay After Greeting
The number of seconds ASSP will wait to answer a banner greeting . No
delay is imposed if the field is left blank or set to 0.
(10 seconds is max for security)
Please try it.
Banner delay is
22 matches
Mail list logo
