(domains or email) per domain that I hosts.
Do you know if you can do?
Thanks in advance.
Eric Shubert wrote:
Jorge R. Constenla wrote:
The SpamDyke works great! without bugs.
But is Very usefull (Excellent), if you can set some features per domain.
Two Level to filter SPAM
nightduke wrote:
Very strange, i have downloaded the script...
./spamdyke-prune
spamdyke-prune v0.3.0
spamdyke-prune processing graylist tree at /etc/spamdyke/graylist ...
spamdyke-prune pruning entries older than 1814400 seconds ...
spamdyke-prune processing domain vps ...
Greg Cirino wrote:
| Greg Cirino wrote:
| Could someone explain the following error
|
| spamdyke[26182]: ERROR: unable to read from SSL/TLS stream: A protocol
| or
| library failure occurred, error:1408F10B:lib(20):func(143):reason(267) |
| followed by a series of
|
| spamdyke[25977]:
Hans F. Nordhaug wrote:
* Sam Clippinger s...@silence.org [2010-02-13]:
The incorrect directories are not a problem, they're just out of place.
No legitimate deliveries will match those paths, so they won't get in
the way. You can delete them or ignore them as you wish.
OK. Just a
-auth-command=/var/qmail/bin/smtp_auth /var/qmail/bin/true
# smtp-auth-command=/home/lxadmin/mail/bin/vchkpw /bin/true
#smtp-auth-command=bin/cmd5checkpw /var/qmail/bin/true
smtp-auth-command=/home/lxadmin/mail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/true
2010/2/11 Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:
nightduke wrote
Hans F. Nordhaug wrote:
* Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net [2010-02-14]:
Hans F. Nordhaug wrote:
* Sam Clippinger s...@silence.org [2010-02-13]:
The incorrect directories are not a problem, they're just out of place.
No legitimate deliveries will match those paths, so they won't get
Is this perhaps the result of running qtp-prune-graylist? The script
presently only takes one shot at pruning empty directories, which could
leave empty directories at higher levels. I'm beginning to think I
should fix this if it causes config-test to throw errors. What do you
think Sam?
Sam
there are files at the wrong depth -- the graylist
filter expects those entries to be directories, not files, so it prints
an error.
-- Sam Clippinger
On 2/28/10 7:39 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Is this perhaps the result of running qtp-prune-graylist? The script
presently only takes one shot at pruning
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
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
Samuel Krieg wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to disable TLS support when the wanted IP address connects to my
server. So I wrote a
file with tls-level=none in the config-dir folder, as described here:
http://www.spamdyke.org/documentation/README.html#CONFIGURATION_DIR
However I see this line
Magnus Ringdahl wrote:
Hi guys.
I have problems with spam coming through my filters.
Here is my spamdyke configs (one for smtp and one for smtps).
# SMTP CONFIG /etc/spamdyke-smtp.conf #
log-level=verbose
filter-level=normal
local-domains-file=/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
t...@uncon.org wrote:
Quoting o...@uni-c.dk:
On 03/11/2010 07:00 PM, Kris Van Hees ae...@alchar.org wrote:
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:51:19 -0500
Hi,
I am currently running spamdyke 4.0.10, and I am experiencing very frequent
cases of hanging spamdyke processes, eating up
Teodor Milkov wrote:
Hello,
It seems the way spamdyke implements TLS is prone to infinite hangs due
to SSL_* functions blocking on IO operations.
There are already some reported cases although no enough debug
information was provided:
t...@uncon.org wrote:
Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:
On a high volume server, defunct processes are much more frequent. They
all appear to be sessions with a spamdyke:TIMEOUT message, although
there are also many TIMEOUTs which do not result in defunct processes.
The defunct
t...@uncon.org wrote:
Quoting Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:
Does this patch activate a timeout effects all (subsequent) read
commands? If not, it won't solve the problem. spamdyke usually hangs
long after the STARTTLS when it does, and the STARTTLS is successful.
The patch needs a bit
The idle-timeout-secs setting is 0 by default, which defeats the
setting. This leaves the server vulnerable to a DoS, per trog in a
recent post.
The use of this settings is thus highly recommended, and we feel that
the default should be something other than 0 (iow, enabled). I think 300
is a
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
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
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
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
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
Good advice, Sebastian.
In addition, you might want to whitelist a particular sender/domain. If
that's the case, you can add cri...@tegado.ro (for the sender) or
@tegado.ro (for the domain) to the whitelist_senders file. Keep in mind
though, that senders are very easy to spoof.
On a side
That's a very good description Faris. Thank you.
Faris Raouf wrote:
When you installed spamdyke, you specified the location of the configuration
file, spamdyke.conf
And I presume that you have looked at this file, and modified it to your
needs.
In this case, your user is being rejected
Leszek wrote:
Hi,
I've search spamdyke_lists but didn't find the aswer. I'm using spamdyke
on Plesk installed on Debian 4.0. The problem is taht the local users
sending e-mail are blocked by spamdyke:
spamdyke[10333]: DENIED_RBL_MATCH from:
u...@mydomain.pl
mailto:u...@mydomain.pl
I don't see any authentication coming from the client in the logs.
The client needs to be configured to authenticate.
Also, David did mean blacklist. Blacklisting the domains you host is
counter intuitive, but effectively blocks spam that spoofs/forges your
domain name.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
Boris Hinzer wrote:
Hello,
can anybody verify this behavior?
We are facing the situation, that if we whiteliste local emailadresse the
smtp auth is completely skipped.
Server is then acting like an open relay for these mailaddresses.
In spamdyke.conf we have the following:
the authentication process.
Cheers,
Sebastian
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 19:03 +0200, Boris Hinzer wrote:
Am 20.05.2010 um 18:15 schrieb Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net:
Boris Hinzer wrote:
Hello,
can anybody verify this behavior?
We are facing the situation, that if we whiteliste local
emailadresse
)?
server_args = -Rt0 /var/qmail/bin/relaylock /usr/local/bin/spamdyke
-f /etc/spamdyke.conf /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
/var/qmail/bin/smtp_auth /var/qmail/bin/true /var/qmail/bin/cmd5checkpw
/var/qmail/bin/true
Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net hat am 20.
Mai 2010 um 20:09
Arvydas wrote:
Hello,
Jun 1 12:16:41 sun spamdyke[10110]: ALLOWED from: *vlgsham* to:
niwtonsilva1...@oi.com.br
mailto:niwtonsilva1...@oi.com.br
is it possible to block non fully qualified senders ?
a
spamd...@guymerritt.com wrote:
I am an extremely half-baked, amateur sysadmin - I really design web sites
and host them myself, and, just barely keep a mail server running as a
courtesy for a few design clients. My point is that perhaps I'm missing
something in the docs (because I'm a dope).
Eric Shubert wrote:
nightduke wrote:
Hi i have cron jobs daily for backup, freshclam,etc...
it's strange i have received emails sucesfully but now not allowed...
May 30 19:27:02 vps qmail: 1275272822.712321 info msg 23823869: bytes
2951 from anonym...@vps.vps qp 7551 uid 0
May 30 19:27:02
Hartmut Wernisch wrote:
On 22 Mar 10, Mirko Buffoni wrote:
At 13.10 19/03/2010 +0100, you wrote:
At 13.39 19/03/2010 +1100, you wrote:
On 19/03/2010 07:15, t...@uncon.org wrote:
Started a new thread for this improved patch. This should fix the
SSL_accept, SSL_shutdown and SSL_read issues. It
Daniel wrote:
Hi!
Is it possible to skip RBL checks and automatically deny requests for a
specific domain or addresses?
I think the denial is with this option:
recipient-blacklist-ent...@domain.tld
But the above only starts blacklisting after the RBL-lookup. It would be
nice if the
I notice that the --config-test option is painfully slow with a graylist
of any size. I just ran it with a graylist of 5000 entries, and it took
several minutes. It did finally finish fine, so it's not much of a
problem. In comparison, qtp-prune-graylist ran against the same graylist
in 8
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
, by comparison, is only
looking at the dates on the files and folders, so it can run much faster.
-- Sam Clippinger
On 7/9/10 11:23 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I notice that the --config-test option is painfully slow with a graylist
of any size. I just ran it with a graylist of5000 entries, and it took
Les Fenison wrote:
I am having trouble doing smtp and smtps both. I am only able to do
one or the other.
If I set tls-level=smtp, smtps on port 465 will not connect but I can
do tls on port 25
if I set tls-level=smtps I can do smtps but can not do tls on port 25.
Shouldn't I be
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
Also, there is a qtp-install-spamdyke script which is part of the
qmailtoaster-plus package (http://qtp.qmailtoaster.com). Just run the
script after installing the package, and that's all there is to it. You
can tailor the /etc/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf file to your liking, per the
link sanjeev
Noel Rivera (Border Less) wrote:
Hello list this is my first post.
I have the problem with 1 of my 6 domains in my qmail server with spamdyke.
I need to configure separated options for this domain, I need don’t
block example this options:
reject-empty-rdns
nightduke wrote:
i want to clean spam from an email i have on a mail server, i want to
chech each our that email account, spamdyke will check rbl and all
emails that match rbl will be deleted.
Can this be done with spamdyke? or i can't do that with spamdyke.
Thanks
spamdyke relies on the
Marcin Orlowski wrote:
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 21:01:39 +0200, Marcin Orlowski car...@wfmh.org.pl
wrote:
I'd rather expect DENIED_IDENTICAL_SENDER_RECIPIENT to appear
in logs, as such filter definitely costs less than
DNS queries. I tried to find filter chain described in the
manual, but
firewall or no service stopping my telnet to 25
only options defined in spamdyke.conf is not working from outside.
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net wrote:
If telnet to port 25 works ok from your server but not from an external
host, then your problem would
On 10/29/2010 02:38 AM, David Stiller wrote:
Hi all,
by accident i have used the entry
rhs-blacklist-entry=block.rhs.mailpolice.com in my config.
That list is down sind June 2010, but spamdyke blocked all incoming mails.
The list still
responds to the subdomain rhs.mailpolice.com:
;;
On 10/31/2010 08:44 AM, Angus McIntyre wrote:
nightduke wrote:
I'm tired of spam, i want to use spamdyke with dspam or mailscanner.
I don't want to receive virus, i want to block spam with spamdyke but
also i want to have more features like dspam or mailscanner have,
after the mail server is
On 11/16/2010 02:37 PM, psotnic wrote:
Dear Sirs!
First of all I would like to thank You for Your time!
My question:
Is it possible to disable greylisting when sending e-mails between two
users on the same domain?
(ex. m...@example.com
mailto:m...@example.com to
a...@example.com
, or are you just investigating?
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 11/17/2010 02:42 AM, psotnic wrote:
How would that apply in case of a pop3 before smtp?
On 17 November 2010 02:07, Eric Shubert
e...@shubes.net
mailto:e...@shubes.net wrote:
On 11/16/2010 02:37 PM, psotnic wrote:
Dear Sirs
Ever so true. Anyone using qmail who is not using Qmail-Toaster is
making things harder than they need to be. :)
However, the stock QMT configuration does not support pb4s. It could be
modified to do so, but pb4s is not a preferred authentication mechanism,
for good reasons.
On 11/17/2010
On 11/20/2010 12:22 PM, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
OK, I think I figured out the issue!
Similarly, I did a ton of Googling with very little success in finding a
solution. Hopefully this will be in the archive and help someone down
the line ...
My setup is a hand-rolled Qmail + Spamdyke setup.
) just in case, and (2) in case I replace spamdyke with something
else, so I don't forget to re-add it.
On 11/20/10 8:46 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Why do you need recordio when spamdyke has such a nice detailed logging
facility?
Doesn't spamdyke take care of what fixcrio does, making fixcrio
This appears to me to be a deficiency in qmail-scanner more so than
spamdyke. Simscan, as opposed to qmail-scanner, has a compile option
which turns off scanning for authenticated users, and works fine with
the present spamdyke.
Simscan is what the current QMail-Toaster utilizes, although
I believe that the --test-config option interrogates the greylist tree
for problems there. I would run spamdyke with this option (separately,
from the CLI) to see if it finds a problem.
Here's a script that does this on qmail-toaster:
# set variables for qmail-smtpd using harmless test values,
On 01/07/2011 08:53 AM, Christian Schramm wrote:
Hello,
I'm having a simple question.
I've integrated spamdyke into qmail. What I'd like to do is to limit
spamdyke to accept mail just from one or several IP adresses and block
all the rest.
Is there a simple way to implement this?
Thanks
, Christian Schramm wrote:
Well I don't have tcpserver installed, so before installing something
new I wanted to check if there's perhaps an easy way doing this in spamdyke.
I'll have a look at tcpserver and how to integrate it with Plesk.
Kind regards
Christian Schramm
Le 07/01/2011 17:03, Eric
You're correct. I didn't read it thoroughly. Sorry.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 01/12/2011 04:56 PM, Michael Colvin wrote:
Did you try using Upper Case ALLOW (not shouting)? That's what's shown
in the documentation.
In any case, I would expect Spamdyke to show some sort of error if/when
On 02/25/2011 09:14 PM, Shane Bywater wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to install Spamdyke 4.2 with TLS support but the
configure
script shows:
checking if openssl/ssl.h will include without additional include
directories... no
checking Checking if openssl/ssl.h will include
that I'm not the only one who has
apparently seen this problem. Thanks Shane. ;)
-- Sam Clippinger
On 2/25/11 3:05 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Running the latest spamdyke 4.2.0+TLS+CONFIGTEST+DEBUG on CentOS5.4 x86,
Using caching-nameserver on localhost, and I'm not seeing any named
errors
This came across on the Dovecot list recently:
http://marc.info/?l=postfix-usersm=129952854117623w=2
Eric B on the QMT list has done some testing, and it appears that both
spamdyke and qmail-smtpd presently contain this flaw.
Sam, will you have a look into this? The link explains the situation
, Eric Shubert wrote:
Running the latest spamdyke 4.2.0+TLS+CONFIGTEST+DEBUG on CentOS5.4 x86,
Using caching-nameserver on localhost, and I'm not seeing any named
errors in the system log.
I just happened to notice this in my smtp log:
02-25 13:54:30 spamdyke[32582]: DENIED_SENDER_NO_MX from
nameserver is broken and stops with an error. Due to a second oversight
on my part, that error triggers the filter instead of failing gracefully.
So, two bugs. I'll get them fixed. :) Thanks for reporting this!
-- Sam Clippinger
On 3/11/11 10:51 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I did a detail log
I didn't realize that. Don't you need to be registered to post (thus
giving you access to the archive)?
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 05/12/2011 12:19 PM, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
Eric, FWIW, the archive is private ...
On 5/12/11 1:24 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
This is a known bug (2 actually):
http
FWIW, I think that being able to use spamdyke with other mail servers (I
have my eye on postfix) would be a big boon. Solving the IPV6 problem at
the same time would be a bonus.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 05/12/2011 02:48 PM, Sam Clippinger wrote:
It's true spamdyke doesn't handle IPv6, but it's
On 06/08/2011 09:53 AM, ron wrote:
Here is the log of the client that spamdyke is blocking:
06/08/2011 12:42:45 STARTED: VERSION = 4.2.0+TLS+CONFIGTEST+DEBUG, PID =
31888
06/08/2011 12:42:45 CURRENT ENVIRONMENT
PATH=/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin
PWD=/var/qmail/supervise/smtp
On 06/08/2011 10:19 AM, ron wrote:
Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out-01.healthways.com) (64.58.208.13)
by mail2.nsii.net with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 8 Jun 2011
16:48:56 -
I'm not familiar enough with TLS to know exactly what DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA
is, but it appears
No, simply use:
tls-level=none
This will prohibit qmail from using TLS, which would defeat many of
spamdyke's filters.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 06/08/2011 10:25 AM, ron wrote:
To turn off TLS, I would remark out the following lines in my config file?
On 06/08/2011 10:59 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
On 06/08/2011 10:19 AM, ron wrote:
Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out-01.healthways.com) (64.58.208.13)
by mail2.nsii.net with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 8 Jun 2011
16:48:56 -
I'm not familiar enough with TLS to know exactly
-CBC-SHA:EXP-EDH-DSS-DES-CBC-SHA:EXP-DES-CBC-SHA:EXP-RC2-CBC-MD5:EXP-RC2-CBC-MD5:EXP-KRB5-RC4-MD5:EXP-KRB5-RC4-SHA:EXP-RC4-MD5:EXP-RC4-MD5
On 6/8/2011 2:19 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
On 06/08/2011 10:59 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
On 06/08/2011 10:19 AM, ron wrote:
Received: from unknown (HELO mail
forget to restart tcpserver after you change the
run file).
http://www.spamdyke.org/documentation/FAQ.html#TROUBLE9
-- Sam Clippinger
On 6/8/11 3:03 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
The first cipher listed is the same one that qmail used with a
successful transmission.
Looks to me from all
/tripling that number and see if this
problem persists (don't forget to restart tcpserver after you change the
run file).
http://www.spamdyke.org/documentation/FAQ.html#TROUBLE9
-- Sam Clippinger
On 6/8/11 3:03 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
The first cipher listed is the same one that qmail
:53 CLOSED
*Ron Olds *
*National Service Information *
145 Baker St
Marion, Ohio 43302
_ron@nsii.net_
800-235-0337 X122
On 6/9/2011 12:26 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I'm not really concerned about the former.
Will you care to elaborate on the latter? I would think that the -c
option
Here's the name/address of a real guy I'm doing a little troubleshooting
with:
Ron Olds
National Service Information
145 Baker St
Marion, Ohio 43302
Made me think of you, twice.
(Your work address is Baker street, right?)
--
-Eric 'shubes'
___
On 06/09/2011 10:04 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Here's the name/address of a real guy I'm doing a little troubleshooting
with:
Ron Olds
National Service Information
145 Baker St
Marion, Ohio 43302
Made me think of you, twice.
(Your work address is Baker street, right?)
(Sorry for this post
ERROR: unable to read from SSL/TLS stream: The operation failed due to
an I/O error, Unexpected EOF found
06/09/2011 13:47:36 - TLS ended and closed
06/09/2011 13:47:36 CLOSED
On 6/9/2011 1:07 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I hadn't read your non-fixed post yet. :( (I use threaded view)
Can you try
allocate a buffer or whatever. Given the number of problems it seems to
create, I'd vote for simply removing it.
-- Sam Clippinger
On 6/9/11 10:28 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Ron,
Can you do a little testing and see what's adequate? I expect that 128M
is a bit overkill. We'll need to get the QMT
Ron eliminated softlimit entirely, and still has the error.
Thanks for the suggestion though.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 06/10/2011 05:11 AM, BC wrote:
There is something else amiss here, from my reading of the logs. If
there is gobs of memory available, then do as Sam suggests and
allocate a LOT
Please read through the previous posts on the subject.
Thanks for helping.
On 06/10/2011 08:57 AM, Jose Galvez wrote:
Ok so turn off tls, how can we help you?
How can we see what's going on if we can see only.
It's not working
Just
That TLS is the problem
Please don't get angry with me, my
I'm under the impression that if you use
tls-level=none
in your spamdyke config, then it works. If you haven't tried this,
please do.
On 06/10/2011 09:11 AM, ron wrote:
When I disable spamdyke, qmail accepts the emails just fine, its when
spamdyke is enabled that
the emails can not be
as tests also and so far he has confirmed that the issue is with
spamdyke TLS
from what I have gathered.
On 6/10/2011 12:20 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I'm under the impression that if you use
tls-level=none
in your spamdyke config, then it works. If you haven't tried this,
please do.
On 06/10/2011
I'll answer for Ron, as he's using QMT, which I'm familiar with.
On 06/10/2011 10:13 AM, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
It depends, is Qmail using a different cert than Spamdyke is?
No. (per config file)
When you say you're doing TLS directly in Qmail, I'm assuming that
you're using a Qmail that has
On 06/10/2011 10:42 AM, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
On 6/10/11 1:30 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Qmail-TLS appears to use $QMAILDIR/control/servercert.pem and uses 512-
and 1024-bit DH param files, as well. I can see that Ron's Spamdyke
configuration is pointing at the same certificate, but doesn't
the Spamdyke code now, there's a few technical issues I'd like
to raise ... in a separate post, perhaps.
Great.
Yeah, this thread's getting a little long (again).
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 6/10/11 2:20 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I'm sure you know more about SSL than I do, and I'm just wondering
Putting your domain's addresses in whitelist_recipients pretty much
defeats the purpose of spamdyke.
Putting your domain's addresses in whitelist_senders would create a
nearly open relay, allowing anyone to use your sever as a relay by
simply knowing one of the addresses. Very bad idea.
I would suspect that your spamdyke.conf file somehow isn't the one being
used. Just a guess. What does your run file contain?
On 06/13/2011 01:00 PM,
li...@deltatechnicalservices.com wrote:
In my /etc/spamdyke.conf I have these two lines...
ip-blacklist-file=/etc/spamdyke.d/ip-blacklist.conf
/qmail/bin/tcp-env
server_args = -Rt0 /usr/local/bin/spamdyke -f /etc/spamdyke.conf
/var/qmail/bin/relaylock /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
/var/qmail/bin/smtp_auth /var/qmail/bin/true /var/qmail/bin/cmd5checkpw
/var/qmail/bin/true
}
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 13:23:31 -0700, Eric Shubert wrote:
I would
On 06/13/2011 04:12 PM, Spamdyke User wrote:
There isn't much in the receivers whitelist but, since I have so little
in these files, I will include them here... My entire spamdyke.conf was
attached to a previous message so now you have it all except my version
info which is
spamdyke
Nice catch, Dave!
Sooo many comments to weed through. It'd be nice if posters would
eliminate comments from their configuration files they post:
# cat spamdyke.conf | grep -v '^#'
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 06/13/2011 05:07 PM, David Mitchell wrote:
Here's your problem:
Do you know for sure that they're coming from an external source? Could
it be an infected machine that's sending them?
In either case, I don't know of a way to throttle a user's activity. I
would check the logs for the offending account(s), and change the
password(s).
Also, be sure that no
Is it spamdyke that's using the CPU, or another process? clamav had a
problem doing this sort of thing a couple versions back (0.95.x iirc).
Other than that, I haven't heard of anything like this. I'd look at
processes related to queuing (scanners?) and see if there's a problem in
that area.
On 09/02/2011 11:34 AM, Marcin Orlowski wrote:
hi,
I got odd issue with one of my smtp box and I got some problems
finding the culprit out. The problem is that it takes
ages for smptd prompt to appear:
# telnet localhost 25
Trying 127.0.0.1...
[... wait, wait, wait ...]
Connected to
On 11/02/2011 03:11 AM, t...@uncon.org wrote:
Quoting Eric Shuberte...@shubes.net:
I've been wondering though about perhaps using tmpfs for the graylist
tree. That might be a potential solution as well for hosts that process
huge amounts of email. Of course the whole tree would be lost on
On 11/21/2011 04:23 AM, turgut kalfaoğlu wrote:
Hi there. what is the correct format for the whitelist_senders file?
I want to whitelist an entire domain with a borked DNS in the whitelist..
Do I do
*@abc.com
or just
abc.com
in this file?
Thanks
-t
I use
@abc.com
--
-Eric
On 01/04/2012 10:58 AM, Sam Clippinger wrote:
Just when you thought it was safe to go back to your Inbox, spamdyke
version 4.2.1 is now available:
http://www.spamdyke.org/
This version extends the log messages to show why a blacklist is
matched. It also fixes a few minor bugs.
Version 4.x
Has anyone here used junkemailfilter.com's DNS blacklist or (more
significantly) whitelist
(http://wiki.junkemailfilter.com/index.php/Spam_DNS_Lists) in
conjunction with spamdyke? Just wondering if it's compatible, given the
multiple return statuses that junkemailfilter uses. If so, sample
not seem to have that patch installed.
It's a huge pain to recompile qmail with plesk's patches, plus the empf.. -t
On 07.01.2012 18:02, Eric Shubert wrote:
On 01/07/2012 07:39 AM, turgut kalfaoğlu wrote:
For some reason, we have massive amounts of mail coming from facebook,
to one local user
On 01/07/2012 07:39 AM, turgut kalfaoğlu wrote:
For some reason, we have massive amounts of mail coming from facebook,
to one local user.
I am unable to stop it, because the From is different every time, there
are hundreds of users in the To: header,
and the local recipient is always one
On 01/27/2012 04:38 PM, Sam Clippinger wrote:
Interesting suggestions. The first one, logging how many users authenticate
without TLS/SSL, is basically already there. Since the log messages already
show both the authenticated user and the encryption status, you should be
able to parse
Very nice explanation Sam.
Thanks for all you do.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 02/14/2012 06:53 PM, Sam Clippinger wrote:
Yes and no. From a purely academic standpoint, it takes less work/time for
spamdyke to reject a blacklisted recipient than to perform the DNS tests
because searching a file is
On 03/20/2012 03:00 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I did a little testing, and this appears to be just a bug in the
config-test. With these settings, cram-md5 is not advertised, and
authentication does work.
After a little more testing, I discovered that qmail-smtpd (w/chkuser)
is rejecting non
senders and qmail-smtpd will accept non-local recipients passed by spamdyke.
-- Sam Clippinger
On Mar 21, 2012, at 5:49 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
On 03/20/2012 03:00 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
I did a little testing, and this appears to be just a bug in the
config-test. With these settings
101 - 200 of 283 matches
Mail list logo
