* MacShane, Tracy tracy.macsh...@airservicesaustralia.com:
Then you won't receive some genuine messages, both bounce and
non-bounce.
Try the ips.backscatterer.org RBL; it works well for us.
http://www.mailinglistarchive.com/postfix-users@postfix.org/msg57402.html
They are retarded.
Hi
I want to reject mails those which are not specified in virtual_alias_maps
Have tried
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
permit_mynetworks,
reject_unlisted_recipient
check_relay_domains
reject_unknown_recipient_domain,
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/dbs/sender_access-accept
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:24:09 +0200, Pawe+ Le+niak wrote:
W dniu 2009-04-14 08:06, Ralf Hildebrandt pisze:
They are retarded. mail.charite.de is listed in it.
You're definitely not right.
Testresult for 141.42.4.200:
This IP IS CURRENTLY NOT LISTED in our Database.
B U T, it was listed
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:27:55 +0200, Pawe+ Le+niak wrote:
W dniu 2009-04-14 11:56, Rod Whitworth pisze:
Oh dear, that's all really too much trouble. I have OpenBSD's spamd
running in front of my MTA. A script checks all greylisted entries for
invalid recipients with sender and tarpits them.
W dniu 2009-04-14 11:56, Rod Whitworth pisze:
Oh dear, that's all really too much trouble. I have OpenBSD's spamd
running in front of my MTA. A script checks all greylisted entries for
invalid recipients with sender and tarpits them.
If mail goes to invalid recipient it can be *rejected*.
W dniu 2009-04-14 13:54, Rod Whitworth pisze:
Remember I did say that I was applying this to null sender to
non-existing recipients (who were purported to be the original
senders). We have about 60 spamtrap addresses. Most invented by
spammers.
I'd imagine somewhat better usage of
Hi
I have made a spamfilter server based on Postfix and MailScanner. I
wan't postfix to reject emails to email-addresses that does not exist
on our exchange server. I use a nice perl script that collects the
email-addresses from Exchange AD with LDAP.
main.cf:
--
* Martin Schiøtz mali...@gmail.com:
Hi
I have made a spamfilter server based on Postfix and MailScanner. I
wan't postfix to reject emails to email-addresses that does not exist
on our exchange server. I use a nice perl script that collects the
email-addresses from Exchange AD with LDAP.
I installed it with apt-get install postfix and then choose Internet Site
during the configuration.
i have configured rails to use smtp.
config.action_mailer.smtp_settings = {
:address = 'localhost',
:port = 25,
:domain = 'www.example.com',
}
- Original
Hello,
I have a question, is there a way that i can control the number of
connection that is open whith another ISP from my relay ? For example. what
i'd like to do is :
Delevery messages to gmail : open max 200 connections from my relay to gmail
Delivery messages to yahoo: open max 100
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 03:01:07PM -0300, Alexandre Carlim wrote:
Hello,
I have a question, is there a way that i can control the number of
connection that is open whith another ISP from my relay ? For example. what
i'd like to do is :
Delevery messages to gmail : open max 200
Paweł Leśniak a écrit :
W dniu 2009-04-13 22:46, mouss pisze:
does reject_unknown_sender_domain really reject that many spam (that is
not rejected by zen among other things)?
According to RFC1912:
(...)
2.1 Inconsistent, Missing, or Bad Data
Every Internet-reachable host *should* have
Ralf Hildebrandt a écrit :
* MacShane, Tracy tracy.macsh...@airservicesaustralia.com:
Then you won't receive some genuine messages, both bounce and
non-bounce.
Try the ips.backscatterer.org RBL; it works well for us.
Noel Jones a écrit :
Dennis Carr wrote:
Looking at options here for eliminating backscatter.
I've reviewed the Howto for this, but it only seems to be effective
against backscatter where one's home domain is forged - not too useful,
IMNSHO, because spammers aren't always going to forge the
W dniu 2009-04-14 23:00, mouss pisze:
Paweł Leśniak a écrit :
W dniu 2009-04-13 22:46, mouss pisze:
does reject_unknown_sender_domain really reject that many spam (that is
not rejected by zen among other things)?
According to RFC1912:
(...)
2.1 Inconsistent, Missing, or Bad
W dniu 2009-04-14 23:11, mouss pisze:
Ralf Hildebrandt a écrit :
* MacShane, Tracytracy.macsh...@airservicesaustralia.com:
Then you won't receive some genuine messages, both bounce and
non-bounce.
Try the ips.backscatterer.org RBL; it works well for us.
Paweł Leśniak a écrit :
W dniu 2009-04-14 23:00, mouss pisze:
[snip]
and spammers seem to forge valid addresses, so the check looks useless
to me.
How do they forge a client DNS A records consistent with PTR records?
I meant they use forged sender addresses where the domain is valid. for
Paweł Leśniak a écrit :
W dniu 2009-04-14 23:11, mouss pisze:
Ralf Hildebrandt a écrit :
* MacShane, Tracy tracy.macsh...@airservicesaustralia.com:
Then you won't receive some genuine messages, both bounce and
non-bounce.
Try the ips.backscatterer.org RBL; it works well for us.
W dniu 2009-04-14 23:47, mouss pisze:
Paweł Leśniak a écrit :
W dniu 2009-04-14 23:00, mouss pisze:
[snip]
and spammers seem to forge valid addresses, so the check looks useless
to me.
How do they forge a client DNS A records consistent with PTR records?
I meant
Paweł Leśniak wrote:
I'd even ask - is ANY list doing SAV? It's hard for me to imagine
sending thousands of emails to users who had already confirmed email
address during registration.
Some lists accept posts from un sub scribed senders. Some of
those lists do SAV. Some of the sourceforge
Hi Folks,
I've been rebuilding a server that was working fine, but then crashed.
In the process I've installed a newer (current) version of Postfix, and
suddenly I'm seeing an aliasing problem that I've never seen before.
Maybe somebody can help figure this out.
This has to do with the
missing piece of information (inserted below)
Miles Fidelman wrote:
Hi Folks,
I've been rebuilding a server that was working fine, but then
crashed. In the process I've installed a newer (current) version of
Postfix, and suddenly I'm seeing an aliasing problem that I've never
seen before.
Why don't you simply restore the Postfix configuration from backups,
and execute postfix upgrade-configuration to upgrade to the newer
Postfix?
A great deal of effort is put into keeping features compatible, so
that people like you don't have to play detective after an upgrade.
Let the system
Wietse Venema wrote:
Why don't you simply restore the Postfix configuration from backups,
and execute postfix upgrade-configuration to upgrade to the newer
Postfix?
A great deal of effort is put into keeping features compatible, so
that people like you don't have to play detective after an
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
[mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of mouss
Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 2009 7:11 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: A better backscatter killer?
Ralf Hildebrandt a écrit :
* MacShane, Tracy
I noticed this perhaps unrelated problem in the log:
Apr 14 14:00:51 mailscan postfix/smtp[73427]: fatal: shared lock
active/29E97222038E_9DE187AF: Resource temporarily unavailable
Let's ignore the non-Postfix queue filename for a moment.
The above error message means that the queue manager
Wietse,
So... other than my mistake in not running postfix upgrade-configuration
(which, when I run it now, seems to do nothing) - any thoughts on why a
virtual address resolves just fine when received from outside, but not
when submitted by a program invoking /usr/bin/sendmail?
Thanks,
Miles Fidelman:
Wietse,
So... other than my mistake in not running postfix upgrade-configuration
(which, when I run it now, seems to do nothing) - any thoughts on why a
virtual address resolves just fine when received from outside, but not
when submitted by a program invoking
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 08:14:17PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Wietse,
So... other than my mistake in not running postfix upgrade-configuration
(which, when I run it now, seems to do nothing) - any thoughts on why a
virtual address resolves just fine when received from outside, but not
--Original Message Text---
From: Pawe+ Le+niak
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:50:57 +0200
8 snip-
I don't like top-posting but..
Due to your message formatting it is not possible for someone to easily
see who said what in your reply. So simply for the benefit of others
who may have had a
30 matches
Mail list logo
