Hello,
On a VM guest (running under KVM) with CentOS 5.8, I yesterday strangely
got the following (see below).
The server runs apache/php/squirrelmail/postfix/dovecot/openldap and it
is a production server.
Do you advise to do some particular file system checks or other
settings? Any other
On Wednesday 02 May 2012, Alan M. Evans wrote:
Hello all...
I maintain an amateurish email list for my wife's website on my CentOS 6
server. Once-a-month, she sends mail to mylista...@mydomain.com and
the /etc/aliases file redirects that to my script:
mylistaddr: | /usr/bin/php-cgi
Dear All,
Since RHEL/Centos went to Firefox10, I have about 50 users who have
sync-pop-ups.
Does anyone knows a quick and very dirty way to get rid of sync all
together?
I searched the Mozilla Forum, but found no clean Linux-solution, without
me having to log in to every account and run
I have a strange problem on a CentOS-5.8 machine.
I can only login as root.
If I try to login with one of the user's names,
it hangs for a long time.
I thought it hung forever, but I just found that
I do login after su tim after 5 minutes.
It seems that the problem lies in repeated messages in
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 13:47 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I have a strange problem on a CentOS-5.8 machine.
I can only login as root.
If I try to login with one of the user's names,
it hangs for a long time.
I thought it hung forever, but I just found that
I do login after su tim after 5
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 10:33 +0100, Colin Coles wrote:
On Wednesday 02 May 2012, Alan M. Evans wrote:
Hello all...
I maintain an amateurish email list for my wife's website on my CentOS 6
server. Once-a-month, she sends mail to mylista...@mydomain.com and
the /etc/aliases file redirects
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 06:54 -0700, Alan M. Evans wrote:
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 10:33 +0100, Colin Coles wrote:
On Wednesday 02 May 2012, Alan M. Evans wrote:
Hello all...
I maintain an amateurish email list for my wife's website on my CentOS 6
server. Once-a-month, she sends mail to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/03/2012 10:02 AM, Alan M. Evans wrote:
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 06:54 -0700, Alan M. Evans wrote:
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 10:33 +0100, Colin Coles wrote:
On Wednesday 02 May 2012, Alan M. Evans wrote:
Hello all...
I maintain an amateurish
Dear All Greetings,
i am seeking help from guys with mysql knowledge. i can see lot of these
files in mysql directory. And they are eventually filling up the space on
the server. what these files are? some exists with very old time stamps.
such as February 2012. can these be deleted?
This
On 27.04.2012 12:55, Nux! wrote:
Anyway, for those of you interested to run the RPMs from the
libreoffice.org tarball instead of the stock packages, I put them all
in
a repo.
Repo updated with 3.5.3:
http://www.nux.ro/archive/2012/05/LibreOffice_org_RPMs_repo_updated.html
--
Sent from the
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Prabhpal S. Mavi
prabh...@digital-infotech.net wrote:
Dear All Greetings,
i am seeking help from guys with mysql knowledge. i can see lot of these
files in mysql directory. And they are eventually filling up the space on
the server. what these files are?
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:25:02AM -0400, Tait Clarridge wrote:
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 13:47 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I have a strange problem on a CentOS-5.8 machine.
I can only login as root.
If I try to login with one of the user's names,
it hangs for a long time.
I thought it
[ Sorry about the private message. Reply-to header wasn't set in your
message. Resending to all... ]
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 10:19 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What AVC messages are you seeing?
None now, as I said. But before I applied the local policy, the denials
were:
type=AVC
On May 3, 2012, at 5:47 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I have a strange problem on a CentOS-5.8 machine.
I can only login as root.
If I try to login with one of the user's names,
it hangs for a long time.
I thought it hung forever, but I just found that
I do login after su tim after 5 minutes.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/03/2012 10:40 AM, Alan M. Evans wrote:
[ Sorry about the private message. Reply-to header wasn't set in your
message. Resending to all... ]
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 10:19 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What AVC messages are you seeing?
2012/5/3 Alan M. Evans a...@extratech.com:
[ Sorry about the private message. Reply-to header wasn't set in your
message. Resending to all... ]
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 10:19 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What AVC messages are you seeing?
None now, as I said. But before I applied the local
On May 1, 2012, at 4:05 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Giles Coochey wrote:
So I have copied /etc/openldap/slapd.conf from the old server to the new
and also copied the old DB_CONFIG to /var/lib/ldap
(these files are not used under CentOS-6, as far as I can see),
and run
Under Centos 6.2
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 11:04 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
On 05/03/2012 10:40 AM, Alan M. Evans wrote:
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 10:19 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
What AVC messages are you seeing?
None now, as I said. But before I applied the local policy, the denials
were:
on 5/2/2012 9:36 AM Prabhpal S. Mavi spake the following:
ntpdate should be run just once and then just have ntpd on.. the nptdate
should bring the server to the proper time and cause dovecot to
fail..you should only need to run it once (assuming the server is left
on and not off for long
Dear Friends,
i have setup SPF alright, postfix is performing check as well (results
below), but even if there is no SPF record exist for a domain, message is
still accepted.
how can i set the reject action, if no SPF available.
May 3 16:11:14 titan postfix/policy-spf[5353]: : SPF none (No
Hi Prabh,
i have setup SPF alright, postfix is performing check as well (results
below), but even if there is no SPF record exist for a domain, message is
still accepted.
how can i set the reject action, if no SPF available.
are you sure you want to do this? It will definitely result in
are you sure you want to do this? It will definitely result in lots of
legitimate mail being blocked, because SPF is by no means ubiquitous.
You can set up your mail server to block mail if the SPF record suggests
it, but I would never filter mail originating from domains having no SPF
On 5/3/2012 12:40 PM, Prabhpal S. Mavi wrote:
are you sure you want to do this? It will definitely result in lots of
legitimate mail being blocked, because SPF is by no means ubiquitous.
You can set up your mail server to block mail if the SPF record suggests
it, but I would never filter mail
1. SPF was not designed to be used this way. It is doubtful that anyone
has written anything that even remotely considered this option in use.
You will likely have to write it yourself.
2. SPF is still in RFC testing, so it is not yet a full internet
standard. And once it is, the standard
1. SPF was not designed to be used this way. It is doubtful that anyone
has written anything that even remotely considered this option in use.
You will likely have to write it yourself.
2. SPF is still in RFC testing, so it is not yet a full internet
standard. And once it is, the standard
Hi Prabh,
Thanks for your advice, i actually know this. what would you say about
those who put there efforts to implement SPF. why they do it?
*if* someone sets up SPF for their domain, SPF works. Among other things, it
can greatly reduce the amount of backscatter you receive due to spammers
From: Timothy Murphy gayle...@eircom.net
To: centos@centos.org
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 5:47 AM
Subject: [CentOS] Can only login as root
I have a strange problem on a CentOS-5.8 machine.
I can only login as root.
If I try to login with one of the
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
violate me (lol)
the attack was so egregious I decided to contact the isp for that ip.
Telepacific.
The ip has some google searches that point to a few spam and a few
attacks...So i assume a compromised server.
So I sent them
bob wrote:
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
violate me (lol)
You can use fail2ban as a condom g
the attack was so egregious I decided to contact the isp for that ip.
Telepacific.
The ip has some google searches that point to a few spam and a few
On 05/03/2012 01:43 PM, bob wrote:
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
So I sent them the info and said it must be a hacked server (the ip is
on their business network)
Responsible ISP's maintain an 'abuse' mailbox (e.g., ab...@isp.com).
Complaints I've sent
Tim Evans wrote:
On 05/03/2012 01:43 PM, bob wrote:
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
So I sent them the info and said it must be a hacked server (the ip is
on their business network)
Responsible ISP's maintain an 'abuse' mailbox (e.g., ab...@isp.com).
On 5/3/2012 1:59 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Tim Evans wrote:
On 05/03/2012 01:43 PM, bob wrote:
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
So I sent them the info and said it must be a hacked server (the ip is
on their business network)
Responsible ISP's maintain an
bob wrote:
On 5/3/2012 1:59 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Tim Evans wrote:
On 05/03/2012 01:43 PM, bob wrote:
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
So I sent them the info and said it must be a hacked server (the ip is
on their business network)
Responsible ISP's
Hi all, I posed the below yesterday but have new info.
Only across NFS does a 2.5MB file show as 64MB.
When locally on the NFS server itself, the file still shows as 2.5MB.
Any nuggets?
- aurf
Begin forwarded message:
From: aurfalien aurfal...@gmail.com
Date: May 2, 2012 12:56:05 PM EDT
On May 3, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Glenn Cooper wrote:
I never really paid attention to this but a file on an NFS mount is
showing 64M in size, but when copying the file to a local drive, it
shows 2.5MB in size.
My NFS server is hardware Raided with a volume stripe size of 128K
were the volume
On May 3, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Glenn Cooper wrote:
I never really paid attention to this but a file on an NFS mount is
showing 64M in size, but when copying the file to a local drive, it
shows 2.5MB in size.
My NFS server is hardware Raided with a volume stripe size of 128K
were the volume
On 05/03/2012 09:16 PM, aurfalien wrote:
On May 3, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Glenn Cooper wrote:
I never really paid attention to this but a file on an NFS mount is
showing 64M in size, but when copying the file to a local drive, it
shows 2.5MB in size.
My NFS server is hardware Raided with a
On 05/03/2012 12:43 PM, bob wrote:
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
violate me (lol)
the attack was so egregious I decided to contact the isp for that ip.
Telepacific.
The ip has some google searches that point to a few spam and a few
attacks...So i assume
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
On 05/03/2012 09:16 PM, aurfalien wrote:
On May 3, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Glenn Cooper wrote:
I never really paid attention to this but a file on an NFS mount is
showing 64M in size, but when copying the file to a local drive, it
shows 2.5MB in size.
snip
By the way,
Steven Tardy wrote:
On 05/03/2012 12:43 PM, bob wrote:
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
violate me (lol)
the attack was so egregious I decided to contact the isp for that ip.
Telepacific.
The ip has some google searches that point to a few spam and a few
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 6:14 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
bob wrote:
On 5/3/2012 1:59 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Tim Evans wrote:
On 05/03/2012 01:43 PM, bob wrote:
so last night all my servers were severely probed and they tried to
So I sent them the info and said it must be a hacked server
On 5/3/2012 1:16 PM, Prabhpal S. Mavi wrote:
1. SPF was not designed to be used this way. It is doubtful that anyone
has written anything that even remotely considered this option in use.
You will likely have to write it yourself.
2. SPF is still in RFC testing, so it is not yet a full
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 3:52 AM, Jesus del Valle yey...@googlemail.comwrote:
Squirellmail provides an html email editor. With the upgrade to
PHP53, the editor continues to work. However, the html email that is
composed using this functionality is received empty.
Hi Max. Testing squirrelmail
On 5/3/2012 4:05 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
whois only lists a technical contact ofhostmas...@telepacific.com.
However, from their website, I went to contact
http://www.telepacific.com/support/corporate-contacts.asp, and see
snip
877-487-8349 Emergency Law Enforcement
Option 2. Fraud and
Have you tryied with http://www.us-cert.gov/ ?
Or http://www.first.org/ ?
Maybe they can help you.
(At least, ArCert helped me a few times)
--
Diego - Yo no soy paranoico! (pero que me siguen, me siguen)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
45 matches
Mail list logo
