[swinog] Re: How to destroy data effectively?
Martin Ebnoether via swinog wrote: > Hi all. > > As some of you know, I work at a money laund... financial > company. Some time ago, the question arose, how to effectively > destroy data safely and securely in an easy way? When I worked in money laun... finance myself, in the 1980s, we used _large_ electromagnets. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (2.7°C) ___ swinog mailing list -- swinog@lists.swinog.ch To unsubscribe send an email to swinog-le...@lists.swinog.ch
[swinog] mail.protection.outlook.com said: 451 4.7.500 Server busy. Please try again later
Does anyone have any idea what sort of rate limits are used by Office365 ? We seem to be hitting $SUBJ more and more often, so we have been scaling back delivery frequencies. It just seems a bit random and arbitrary. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.4°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] emergency connection with a Huawei GSM modem ?
Per Jessen wrote: > A customer with a flooded telephone cable is trying to re-establish > the internet connection over a GSM modem - the mobile operator is > Swisscom. > He is not getting any inbound traffic, e.g. SMTP on port 25. I was > just wondering if this might be blocked? Question answered, many thanks. Customer isn't much happier, but we're working on that :-) -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.0°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] emergency connection with a Huawei GSM modem ?
A customer with a flooded telephone cable is trying to re-establish the internet connection over a GSM modem - the mobile operator is Swisscom. He is not getting any inbound traffic, e.g. SMTP on port 25. I was just wondering if this might be blocked? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.3°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] PTR records with CNAME ?
Tobi wrote: > Am 30.05.2018 um 17:35 schrieb Per Jessen: >> Okay, thanks for clarifying that - I was wondering. I don't why my >> postfixes come up with host name 'unknown'. > > afaik postfix logs "unknown" as well if it is not a FcrRDNS means the > hostname retrieved from a PTR query should forward resolve again to > the ip address. > Yes, that is correct. Provided postfix works with a PTR with a CNAME, that bit is okay. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.1°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] PTR records with CNAME ?
Jeroen Massar wrote: > On 2018-05-30 16:44, Per Jessen wrote: >> According to RFC1034 and 2181, a PTR record using a CNAME is not >> permitted. I believe this to still be correct, postfix certainly >> doesn't work with a CNAME when it does a reverse lookup. > > Postfix certainly does as: > > $ dig +short 50.131.144.213.in-addr.arpa. ptr > 50.63-28.131.144.213.in-addr.arpa. > citadel.ch.unfix.org. > > would otherwise not work and that trick of CNAME'ing in-addr.arpa > space is used a lot by ISPs to delegate space (as per the above > example where init7 forwards them to my nameservers). > > There is also a nice RFC on that: > https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2317.txt Okay, thanks for clarifying that - I was wondering. I don't why my postfixes come up with host name 'unknown'. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (28.8°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] PTR records with CNAME ?
According to RFC1034 and 2181, a PTR record using a CNAME is not permitted. I believe this to still be correct, postfix certainly doesn't work with a CNAME when it does a reverse lookup. Any comments? thanks. Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (28.6°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Bluewin Error: Der MX-Eintrag fuer die Domaene aerni.com kann nicht verifiziert werden
Benoit Panizzon wrote: > Dear List > > Ok, thank you for the replies as they all point out an apparent PTR > Problem, let me reply to the list. > > According to my knowledge of the DNS rfcs (I did not look it up > right now). > > A Host resource may point to an A record another host resource is > already pointing to. A Host resource could also point to multiple A > records (DNS round robin). > > A in-addr.arpa resource can only point to one PTR record. In _can_ in fact have multiple, but it makes no sense and usually only the first one is used. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (3.5°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] UPC Mailservers problems with greylisting
Viktor Steinmann wrote: > On 04.01.2017 08:54, Per Jessen wrote: >> >> Is there any point in greylisting genuine mailservers? We only >> greylist dodgy-looking setups. >> >> >> /Per >> > I don't see how this approach would scale. To my knowledge, it scales quite well. We maintain a list of regex server-name patterns that we consider 'dodgy' as well as a whitelist. If a reverse lookup matches one of these patterns, we greylist. There are some more checks, e.g. on the HELO, but the reverse mapping is the main one. We run this on a cluster of some 45-46 boxes. The list of patterns is fairly stable. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (1.9°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] UPC Mailservers problems with greylisting
Mike Kellenberger wrote: > Hi > > We are seeing problems with greylisting in mails coming from UPC > mailservers. After receiving our "451 Greylisting" response, we never > see a retry of the mail again. The sender does not receive an NDR. We > have seen this behaviour from the servers at 84.116.36.xxx. Other > servers for example the ones in the range 62.179.121.xxx are retrying > correctly. > > Anybody from UPC here to help sort this out or is anyone else seeing > the same problem or is no one using greylisting anymore these days? Is there any point in greylisting genuine mailservers? We only greylist dodgy-looking setups. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (1.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] hotmail issues since 18/1 ?
Gregor Riepl wrote: >> It is truly weird. Using the same sender and same path, one email >> to "some.u...@hotmail.com" is accepted, another >> to "postmas...@hotmail.com" is rejected. > > They are probably ramping up rejection rates slowly, as suggested > here: https://dmarc.org/overview/ After I filed a support request with Microsoft, they got back to me fairly quickly and said one of our IP-ranges was "a candidate for mitigation". No other explanation offered. I don't see this being a dmarc issue at all, but some sort of internal M$ "reputation list". Thanks for everyone's suggestions! -- Per Jessen, Zürich (4.0°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] hotmail issues since 18/1 ?
Per Jessen wrote: > Hoi zäme > > I have a couple of customers complaining they are unable to send > emails to hotmail - typically they see rejects such as this: > >> 550 SC-001 (BAY004-MC5F11) Unfortunately, messages from >> 88.198.198.124 weren't sent. Please contact your Internet service >> provider since part of their network is on our block list. It is truly weird. Using the same sender and same path, one email to "some.u...@hotmail.com" is accepted, another to "postmas...@hotmail.com" is rejected. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (-0.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] hotmail issues since 18/1 ?
Hoi zäme I have a couple of customers complaining they are unable to send emails to hotmail - typically they see rejects such as this: > 550 SC-001 (BAY004-MC5F11) Unfortunately, messages from 88.198.198.124 > weren't sent. Please contact your Internet service provider since part > of their network is on our block list. It doesn't affect all customers and checking our logs, it appears to have started 18/1. Prior to that we had no problems delivering outbound mails to hotmail, since then I see 149 bounces with the message above). The customers are on dynamic ranges from Swisscom, UPC and e.g. Virgin (in the UK). Has anyone seen something similar? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (-0.1°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] hotmail issues since 18/1 ?
Saverio Proto wrote: > Hello, > > it could be that you problem is related to DMARC. > > big changes are coming, big email providers like gmail,yahoo and I > guess also hotmail are implemeting DMARC. Use of Strict DMARC Policies > will make this big providers reject emails. > >https://dmarc.org/2015/10/global-mailbox-providers-deploying-dmarc-to-protect-users/ The senders have not published any DMARC entries - also, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I have just tried sending mails to "postmas...@hotmail.com" from a couple of our servers at Hetzner, same error message. Other messages go through fine. (28 today sofar). /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (0.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] UPC rejecting mails as spam?
Does anyone @UPC happen to know what this means: host mx.hispeed.ch [213.46.255.2]: 552 5.2.0 rl4b1r00p3kCCMl01l4bgK automated process detected unsolicited content The email is being sent from a UPC connection, via Hostpoint (mail.hostpoint.ch) to a user @swissonline.ch. The user has tried getting an explanation from UPC, but sofar no luck. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (2.8°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] IPv6 Business Conference in Zurich, June 18, 2015 - Swinog Member Discount
Silvia Hagen wrote: Silvia Hagen Chair Swiss IPv6 Council Hi Silvia, FYI, the website http://www.swissipv6council.ch/ seems to only show a welcome page (from iway). On many other pages I get a 404. For instance http://www.swissipv6council.ch/en/membership/register Gruss Per Jessen -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] Bluewin IP blacklists ?
Does anyone happen to know which blacklists Bluewin uses to reject emails up front? One of my customers is complaining he is unable to communicate with Bluewin users: delivery temporarily suspended: host mxzhh.bluewin.ch[195.186.227.50] refused to talk to me: 451 Connection not accepted from blacklisted IP address [74.55.86.74] The IP address belongs to Webfaction.com, they would like to investigate the matter. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (10.4°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Virtual numbers for receiving SMS and voice?
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: Per, I propose that first you actually try it before telling. Hi Stanislav you're right, I haven't tried receiving an SMS with Asterisk yet, but do you see any reason why I shouldn't be able to receive SMS on my fixnet line (when it's been correctly set up in Asterisk) ? For the last 2-3 years, I have been getting the occasional message read out to me by Swisscom. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.8°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Virtual numbers for receiving SMS and voice?
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: well, last time I tried, it was only possible to send an SMS from a Swisscom mobile to a Swisscom fixline. We send SMS'es every day the other way, i.e. from fixline to mobile. This is via ISDN though. SIP providers were out of scope, and non-Swisscom GSM providers were too. Probably it's slightly changed, but I don't see any SMS offering from any SIP provider in Switzerland. Sorry, I missed out that this was with SIP. I've just reviewed our Asterisk config, and we do have a config for receiving SMS'es, but it's been inactive for a couple of years. I also don't see any way of distinguishing between a voice call and an SMS, but I'll have to look closer. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.4°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Virtual numbers for receiving SMS and voice?
Per Jessen wrote: Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: well, last time I tried, it was only possible to send an SMS from a Swisscom mobile to a Swisscom fixline. We send SMS'es every day the other way, i.e. from fixline to mobile. This is via ISDN though. SIP providers were out of scope, and non-Swisscom GSM providers were too. Probably it's slightly changed, but I don't see any SMS offering from any SIP provider in Switzerland. Sorry, I missed out that this was with SIP. I've just reviewed our Asterisk config, and we do have a config for receiving SMS'es, but it's been inactive for a couple of years. I also don't see any way of distinguishing between a voice call and an SMS, but I'll have to look closer. Incoming callerid == SMSC. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.5°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Virtual numbers for receiving SMS and voice?
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: hi all, I need to have a Swiss phone number which can receive SMS and voice calls and forward them to my PBX. I know I can build a gateway with a GSM modem, but I'd rather prefer a service from a provider. Any fixnet line with Asterisk on will also do it. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (8.7°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Lösung für eine SMS-Notfallalarmierung und Statuswebseite
Jeroen Massar wrote: On 2014-04-17 10:24 , Andy Christen wrote: Grüezi und hoi Wir suchen für unsere Firma eine Lösung für eine SMS-Notfallalarmierung. Leider haben wir für diese Situation kein passendes öffentliches Angebot finden können, darum gelange ich an die Swinog-Mailingliste und hoffe, dass jemand von Ihnen/euch eine annähernd gleiche Lösung für sich selbst oder Kunden im Einsatz hat. Wir versenden solche Notfallalarmen über Asterisk und das Swisscom fixed line SMSC. Alarmen werden als Emails generiert und an unser Asterisk Server weitergeleitet. Dort werden die in smsq Befehle umgewandelt, und als Dateien in /var/spool/asterisk/motx/ geschrieben und automatisch von Asterisk gesendet. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.4°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS service, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Carrier Grade NAT – A Look at the Tradeoffs
Fabian Wenk wrote: Hello I just stumbled over the article Carrier Grade NAT – A Look at the Tradeoffs [1] (from Owen DeLong, Hurricane Electric) at Data Center Knowledge. I hope this helps to speed up the deployment of IPv6. I'm still waiting for iWay to provide my company with an IPv6 range on meifi.net. Dunno why it is taking them so long. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (1.3°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free DNS hosting, made in Switzerland. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] New list for jobs
Pascal Gloor wrote: To answer some little unhappyness from Viktor, Per and Stanislav, It is to allow more offers to be posted, especially from job-agencies. We have done this because we were asked by an agency to regularly post on the general list and we refused. Okay, that makes a lot more sense. Perhaps the list would have been better named jobads :-) -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.8°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] New list for jobs
ro...@mgz.ch wrote: well a list doesn't cost anything. I think as well a software developer doesn't like his inbox filled up with law or ciso tips but maybe is interessted to job offers .. and some Tie addicted managers maybe like to offer jobs without read tech messages ;) i would say its a enrichment to have that list. Lists may be cheap, but that is irrelevant. I second Viktors view - splitting the group too much only splits/destroys the group. Besides, a software developer who does not know how to filter SwiNOG mail into a separate folder, well ... :-) -- Per Jessen, Zürich (31.8°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Efficient ADSL2 Bridges nowdays
Attila Kinali wrote: I had a similar problem like you and decided that it is easier if i have all together in one box. Thus i got myself a Solos ADSL Card from Traverse. They work like a charm in Linux. I guess the support for *BSD is equally good. You can get those in europe from kd85.com. Very nice - doesn't look like they do a VDSL version too? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (0.0°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] 6 months logs... no, that's not enough :)
Andreas Fink wrote: one year is already in law for telecommunication (voice calls, SMS etc). My daily headake to keep logs of 3 billion messages lzma compression plus 3Tb harddrives :-) -- Per Jessen, Zürich (6.3°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SMS from analog modem
julien mabillard wrote: Hi, does anyone here remember or uses an analog modem connected to PSTN to send SMS? We used to use sms_client for that, yes. It is not for GSM modem, but plain old analog modem. What were the AT instructions to send? Nothing inparticular. What Swisscom gateway phone number do you use? I'm using landline SMS'ing now, but otherwise I think it was 079 499 9000 at 30Rp/SMS. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (0.9°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SMS from analog modem
Per Jessen wrote: but otherwise I think it was 079 499 9000 at 30Rp/SMS. Sorry, the number Mike Kellenberger posted is the correct one. sms_client also uses ucp. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (1.2°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SMS from analog modem
julien mabillard wrote: On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 06:02:32AM -0800, Stanislav Sinyagin typed: :: why not using a Siemens GSM terminal? :: It has the same RS232 port and AT command set, and you don't :: need a copper line (you would of course need a SIM card). I don't get GSM signal reliably from the data center, so I just use a couple of left analog lines. :) But I found sms_client source code archive and I got what I wanted. Julien, IIRC, we had to fix the code such that the origin phone-number could be set correctly. You might not need it, but by adding a digit to the originating number, we made the mobile phones make different beeps depending on the type of alert. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (1.1°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] The ISP Association: one for all, all for one
JIm Romaguera wrote: Hi Pascal, I'm not saying I'm against your below list - haven't thought about it enough yet - but an ISP association seems to imply ISPs - Internet Service Providers. Your list might be tending to an Internet association (it depends on what so on means I guess). It would be good to have an ISP association to stand up for ISPs. An ISP to me means being obligated to register at BAKOM as a telecommunications provider (Registrierung als gemeldete Fernmeldedienstanbieterin) *because* one is offering some sort of public Internet services. AFAIK, the BAKOM obligation applies if you are providing internet _access_ services. public Internet services is a much wider definition. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (6.7°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] reject_unknown_client_hostname
Martin Blapp wrote: Hi, Does anybody know whether the Postfix checks reject_unknown_client_hostname [aka Reject the request when 1) the client IP address-name mapping fails, 2) the name-address mapping fails, or 3) the name-address mapping does not match the client IP address] follows actually any requirement by a RFC? If so, which one? To reject any mails with errors 5XX with just ONE criterium is very bad behaviour anyway and will always lead to false positives. hmm, how about unknown user :-) Anyway, the default postfix reject for the above is a 450 and always 450 if the failure was caused by a lookup problem. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.0°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] reject_unknown_client_hostname
Juerg Reimann wrote: Does anybody know whether the Postfix checks reject_unknown_client_hostname [aka Reject the request when 1) the client IP address-name mapping fails, 2) the name-address mapping fails, or 3) the name-address mapping does not match the client IP address] follows actually any requirement by a RFC? If so, which one? I feel pretty certain it is not according to any RFC. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (15.0°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Subliminal advertising / Spam from our domain registry switch/nic.ch
Viktor Steinmann wrote: Um... after only surfing their webpage for 30 seconds I found this: Aus den Statuten: Die Stiftung bezweckt, die nötigen Grundlagen für den wirksamen Gebrauch moderner Methoden der Teleinformatik im Dienste der Lehre und Forschung in der Schweiz zu schaffen, zu fördern, anzubieten, sich an solchen zu beteiligen und sie zu erhalten. Die Stiftung verfolgt weder kommerzielle Zwecke noch ist sie auf die Realisierung eines Gewinnes ausgerichtet. (Originalauszug aus der Stiftungsurkunde, Bern, 22. Oktober 1987) So according to their own documents, they have no commercial interest (never laughed so hard). In their defense, they have lowered the registration fees at least three times in the last 8-9 years. That does show some lack of commercial interest. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.6°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Subliminal advertising / Spam from our domain registryswitch/nic.ch
Xaver Aerni wrote: You must see, switch and switchplus are two different company... Switch is non profitable. But switchplus could be a comercial company. This are two difference companys. AFAICT, Switchplus AG is a subsidiary of SWITCH and also shares an address with SWITCH. They're not all that different. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.8°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SMS provider
li...@rebert.name wrote: Dear SWINOG users, I am looking for a SMSC.. Does anybody has an experience with one of them ? We used to use the Swisscom GSM number - 0794998990 - but a couple of months ago, it got unstable, so I took another look. Now we're using the regular landline SMSC 062210, which works very well. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (20.8°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SMS provider
Benoit Panizzon wrote: Hello We used to use the Swisscom GSM number - 0794998990 - but a couple of months ago, it got unstable, so I took another look. Now we're using the regular landline SMSC 062210, which works very well. But you can only send SMS if you're a swisscom customer, so they can charge the SMS on your invoice. True. I belive glue.ch still offers TSP independent SMSSC Services if you regster at them. Judging by http://www.swiss-sms-center.ch/, Swisscom is cheaper :-) -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.1°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Urgent request to clear DNS cache for cablecom.net
Tissieres, Jerome wrote: From behind SWITCH; www.cablecom.ch is not known and www.cablecom.net goes to a godaddy sponsor page. I've tried with VTX DNS, same. From Google (8.8.8.8) it seems better. I didn't read the press, what's happened? http://news.community36.net/redirect/?id=3598 -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.4°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] swisscom smsc 0794998990
Since the beginning of March, we seem to have been having trouble sending SMS'es via this service-number - judging from the phone-bill, the connection IS established, but then times out after 64 seconds and no message is sent. Has anyone else been having such problems? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.7°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Geolocating IP's
Stefan Renner wrote: hello everybody Is anybody of you aware, how the most popular services (Google, Zattoo, Facebook, etc) are matching geographic locations to ip-adresses? So far, the most accurate data I've seen are from countries.nerd.dk - whether they use that, I don't know. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (13.9°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] dirt cheap netbook at Mediamarkt
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: So, it's a pretty great value for money. Ubuntu Netbook Remix 9.10 installed smoothly from flash drive, and everything works out of the box. Skype, Adobe flash, video codecs were downloaded smoothly and worked like charm. I was pretty surprised by the quality of a modern Linux UI. At the back of my mind I still considered it as a server platform :) Gee, Stanislav - KDE3 has been very solid for at least 3-4 years. I've been using nothing else since 2005 or thereabouts. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (4.0°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Debian vs. Ubuntu
Peter Keel wrote: * on the Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 01:36:52PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote: AFAICT from that list, you'd be fine on openSUSE too. Still, nothing wrong with untar+config+make :-) Yes, very wrong. Maintainability goes trough the floor. Or are you sure not to miss a security-relevant update in an insignificant program like tar? Or any other program or library which might be a dependancy of the software you're compiling? When you know what you're doing, I don't see a problem. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (-2.6°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Debian vs. Ubuntu
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: hi Benjamin, long time no see :) Ubuntu was the only OS distribution where all Torrus pre-requisites were available as packages: http://tinyurl.com/yeoxv47 everywhere else one needs to compile a few things from sources. AFAICT from that list, you'd be fine on openSUSE too. Still, nothing wrong with untar+config+make :-) /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (0.6°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Init7 peering
Alexandre Egger wrote: By the way, that comes straight from DECIX people. Remind me that is DECIX? ;) That would be silly if they wouldn't try to sell their services undirectly in some ways... To me it sounds a but like would if it would be some brand of class clothes saying dress well to sign better contracts ads. dress well to sign better contracts - it's not bad advice. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.9°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Spam and IPv6 (Was: killer app for IPv6)
Jeroen Massar wrote: Though I really do not see why one would want to block the countries where great tech comes from. Just use an RBL, and solely use it for scoring Really useful stuff such as rbldnsd does not yet support IPv6 for listings. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (5.3°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] language?
Steven Glogger wrote: if there's a discussion starting in german, and someone is asking for english it would be only polite to try to switch to english... +1 /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (23.7°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Google Safe Browsing vs DNS TCP reply
Guy Baconniere wrote: When the query reaches the DNS of the ISP it will reply with a DNS TCP reply if minimal-responses is no (default on Bind9) or with a small UDP DSN reply if minimal-responses is yes. I can't quite see how that would be correct. When a resolver issues a query with UDP, it will expect a reply (minimal or not) via UDP. Only if it does not get a useful answer via UDP will it change and try a TCP query. I recommend that all ISP use minimal-responses yes or equivalent on their DNS server. This will save bandwidth and avoid DNS TCP reply to be blocked in a Firewall in the path. When the client has issued a TCP query, any half-way decent firewall will know not to block the reply. /Per -- Per Jessen, Herrliberg (19.8°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Request for school presentation on the internet
Norbert Bollow wrote: Hi, my 13 year old son will be giving a talk tomorrow in school about the internet. He has decided to focus in the talk on the technical side, like fundamental principles of how DNS resolution works. He has asked me if I could help him find some datacenter-type equipment that he can show off to the other students in his class. For example some rackmount device and a bit of optical fibre, if possible. There is no need for the stuff to be in working order. No problem Norbert, give me a call. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.1°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Vista has broken RR DNS - comments?
Jeroen Massar wrote: Michael Krygier wrote: Any comments about what Drplokta wrote on his blog about Windows Vista implementing RFC3484 and breaking Round Robin DNS? It does *NOT* break Round Robin DNS, it breaks the assumption what people make when they setup their DNS in that manner. Slight difference ;) It's old news - glibc also implemented rfc3484 in getaddrinfo(), which I reported to novell in dec2007, and which was previous reported in debian. Clients running Vista and where you have a Round-Robin DNS setup where the prefixes are very different will now hit the 'closest' prefix instead of a random one like most implementations of DNS resolvers, that is at first hit, when the connection to the first one fails they will fall back to the next closest one. If you have your hosts on the same subnet you won't notice the difference. You won't get any load-distribution either. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (2.1°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] IPV6 Go (lazy providers)
Nicolas Strina wrote: Ok the hw is quite important but well .. I see lots of CPE able to do the job even on DSL. Nico, which manufacturers do you have in mind? /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (4.2°C) ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] WG: login banner
Tonnerre Lombard wrote: Salut, Michael, On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:32:25 +0100, Michael Naef wrote: http://aeolus.ch/home/blog.php#Idioten%20Signaturen What's the problem with these disclaimers in signatures? Tonnerre DISCLAIMER: IF YOU RECEIVE THIS EMAIL IN ERROR, YOU ARE HEREBY LEGALLY OBLIGED TO PHYSICALLY DESTROY ALL MEDIA WHICH EVER CONTAINED THE MAIL (HARD DISKS, MEMORY, ETC. OF BOTH THE WORKSTATION AND THE MAIL SERVERS), ALONG WITH ALL MATERIAL USED TO TRANSFER, LIQUIDATE ANY COWORKERS WHICH MIGHT HAVE HAD A GLANCE OF THE EMAIL (ESPECIALLY THE SYSTEM ADMINISTRATORS), AND RASP YOUR HEAD OFF WITH A VERY FINE GRATER. For starters, they're barely readable when they're in all-caps :-) My personal favourite is: By sending email to me or to a mailing list to which I subscribe, and appending more than 4 lines of legalese at the end, you are expressly permitting me to use your email and others coming from your domain as I see fit; by posting you are accepting that your long legally sounding signature is invalid. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] trouble to reach a DNS-server from a single network in switzerland
Stephan Wolf wrote: Please do me a favor: try from your datacenter to resolve via this DNS Default server: ns1.allytech.com Address: 200.49.145.101#53 to resolve mail.rebel-management.com Local lookup: dig mail.rebel-management.com worked fine. dig @ns1.allytech.com. mail.rebel-management.com also worked fine. dig @ns2.allytech.com. mail.rebel-management.com also worked fine. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ZH ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] Could someone from Swisscom/Cybernet contact me off-line?
We're having a problem delivering mails to a Cybernet hosted exchange server. thanks Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Could someone from Swisscom/Cybernet contact me off-line?
Per Jessen wrote: We're having a problem delivering mails to a Cybernet hosted exchange server. All sorted. Thanks. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
Tonnerre Lombard wrote: Salut, Marco, On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:22:39 +0200, Marco wrote: fully agreed. thats a bad argument against greylisting. if php scripts or other webserver stuff, like newsletter servers, etc.. use their own MTA which is most likely a fancy carp script, as you said, then its actually not the ISPs problem if a mail won't get delivered. Technically, this is perfectly right, and personally I would like to see everyone writing such scripts burn in hell. But if your users insist on receiving the mail, you will either have to disable greylisting or to get a better set of customers. Another option is to disable greylisting just for that one mailserver. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
Tonnerre Lombard wrote: Salut, Per, On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:47:48 +0200, Per Jessen wrote: Another option is to disable greylisting just for that one mailserver. This implies that either you know all servers hosting broken scripts (NP-complete I think) or your customers will always communicate problems. Usually they encounter them and rant about it on their Stammtisch and then change provider to someone with one hell of a lot of SPAM. Very true - I guess we're fortunate that our customers do tell us about such problems. We actively maintain a list of not-to-be-greylisted servers, plus of course we do auto-whitelisting. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] open source illusions (was: Hot Red Flames (Was: IRC Server dead ?))
Tonnerre Lombard wrote: Salut, Per, On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:01:24 +0200, Per Jessen wrote: fixing something yourself is also pretty much an illusion, except for those few people who are sufficiently involved. When have you last _had_ to fix anything yourself in a stable release of any open source project? Being a member of the security scene, I write patches for Open Source software almost every day. And what about you? I am 99% an open source _user_, and I have only written very few patches. Which proves my point, I think. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] open source illusions
Silvan Gebhardt wrote: I guess it's not about Fixing but also expanding small example: I use a extension to my gnome panel called SSH Menu I can add hosts which it opens me a ssh session in a terminal just by clicking on the menu entry. now I wanted to expand that to include RDP Sessions - okay - took the code, and have it rewritten. so that IS actually an advantage! and I did not have to consult the developers at all, I just checked out the code Sure, this is very possible with open source, and it's certainly one of the advantages - nonetheless, most open source users still do not make use of this possibility. Which is why it is mostly an illusion. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] open source illusions (was: Hot Red Flames (Was: IRC Server dead ?))
Tonnerre Lombard wrote: I think that the advantage of Open Source does indeed lie in the fact that you have the ability to fix things yourself, Hi Tonnerre fixing something yourself is also pretty much an illusion, except for those few people who are sufficiently involved. When have you last _had_ to fix anything yourself in a stable release of any open source project? /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ZH ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] open source illusions
Marc Balmer wrote: actually indent(1), a program to indent and format C program source bears a copyright from 1976: * Copyright (c) 1976 Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. 32 years. And still useful. And this is the oldest copyright I could find in an operating system (OpenBSD) that still ships today. You probably don't have the access anywhere, but try looking at IBMs TPF and you'll find stuff dating back to the early sixties. Surprisingly, TPF has always been open source - for license holders. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Hot Red Flames (Was: IRC Server dead ?)
Jeroen Massar wrote: And of course, with Open Source: did you check every single line of the source, and that of the compiler, and all the tools that that was made with etc etc etc? Ah, indeed you didn't, thus please don't claim that Open Source is more secure because you have the source, because it is impossible to check. The idea of open source is not so much that you get to check it yourself, but much more that it is open for hundreds of thousands of other people to check. If for instance the quality/security of a piece of code is proportional to the number of times it's been reviewed, then yes, open source is quite possibly more secure. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ZH ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] Anyone from Green here?
One of my customers has just been told he needs to pay to get a DNS reverse map entry for thei Green ADSL line with fixed IP. Is that really true?? /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Marc SCHAEFER wrote: On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:37:35AM +0200, Per Jessen wrote: One of my customers has just been told he needs to pay to get a DNS reverse map entry for thei Green ADSL line with fixed IP. Is that really true?? I had a similar query lately, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] replied that with MPS1 (1 IP address) they won't do it, they will do it only for MPS8 and with a delegation. That's the answer my customer got too. That's a pity, but it's how marketing works. It's not only very poor marketing, it's incredibly arrogant. Selling a static IP and then charging extra for the reverse mapping ... /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: Anyway, who's going to send email directly from a broadband connection, instead of using the ISP's relay? :-) Provided everything is properly set up, why shouldn't they? /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: If the reverse mapping points to some valid A record, why do you need to change it? In this case, the reverse lookup returns something like zux000-nnn-nnn.adsl.green.ch. The customer is (quite reasonably) running a mailserver on it, and would like the reverse mapping to be set up properly. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] name-server slowdown?
Claudio Jeker wrote: On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:44:46AM +0200, Per Jessen wrote: Starting Monday this week, we've seen a significant delays and timeouts on our upstream name-servers. We saw something similar on our Hetzner servers, but it seems to have gone away now. Has anyone else seen/experienced name-server issues in the last 2-3 days? I know about the BIND patch from last week, could that somehow be involved? Not sure if this is your problem but the bind patch was released mostly untested. The new mode allocates tons of filedescriptors and fails in various freaky ways. The result is delayed resolving and various other failures plus an increased load on the nameserver itself. Thanks, that sounds very possible - I'll have to check with the guys running the upstream servers. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Has Bluewin a DNS Problem
Franco Hug wrote: Step 1: == Bluewin does a reverse DNS lookup on your IP (195.141.232.78), which returns the following: # nslookup 195.141.232.78 ;; Truncated, retrying in TCP mode. Server: www.multipop.ch. Address:195.141.232.253#53 78.232.141.195.in-addr.arpa name = mailhost.aa795.ch. 78.232.141.195.in-addr.arpa name = mailhost.aerni.net. plus another 20 hosts This is a silly reverse setup. A reverse lookup should only return one hostname, not 20. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
RE: [swinog] Has Bluewin a DNS Problem
Kurt A. Schumacher wrote: ... This is a silly reverse setup. A reverse lookup should only return one hostname, not 20. ... Well, tend to agree. What about the most stupid wanabe Spam-fighter which are very unhappy as in place (e.g. the third-party service provider systems acting with some SC subsidiaries...) which high rate valid messages if certain brain-dead conditions like PTR not matching MX don't match? Trying to work around them with a dodgy DNS setup is not the right course of action, IMHO. If this approach works out, it could be considered. It is not illegal. Correct - it's just silly and it doesn't work as expected. 1) a properly working resolver library will return multiple records rotated once for every lookup, so you're never guaranteed to get the same answer to a reverse lookup. 2) most applications, e.g. mail-servers, that do reverse lookups do not expect more than one reply, and will always only process the first one. It's just against what we are used to over the last 20+ years. Plus it doesn't work. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
RE: [swinog] VDSL/Zyxel P2802 HWL not strong enough for a small company LAN?
Olivier Mueller wrote: I see no traffic peaks, just these disconnects... If it's any help to you - we've also been seeing many disconnects in the last 1-2 weeks. Not on VDSL, just plain ADSL. Typically every day we would have 3-4 quick disconnects during the night, then maybe a few in the morning too. It has stopped since the weekend I think. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] anyone from netstream (netvs.ch) listening here?
Per Jessen wrote: We've got a customer whose emails (from other people but filtered by us) are frequently being rejected by Netstreams harsh SPF-check. I've asked Netstream to add our servers to their whitelist, but nothing has happened. I was just wondering - 1) how many of you guys use SPF to reject emails when the SPF-check returns '-all' ? 2) have a list of exceptions for the above? /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] anyone from netstream (netvs.ch) listening here?
Daniel Roethlisberger wrote: Per Jessen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-05: We've got a customer whose emails (from other people but filtered by us) are frequently being rejected by Netstreams harsh SPF-check. I've asked Netstream to add our servers to their whitelist, but nothing has happened. As a more generic alternative, you could implement SRS in order to handle forwarding in an ``SPF compliant'' way. This will fix the problem for all receivers which use SPF for scoring or rejection. We have been thinking about SRS for a while - I'm wondering if SRS is safe for mailservers that don't implement SPF/SRS? (I'll do my research anyway, but just in case you know right away). /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] anyone from netstream (netvs.ch) listening here?
Per Jessen wrote: We have been thinking about SRS for a while - I'm wondering if SRS is safe for mailservers that don't implement SPF/SRS? (I'll do my research anyway, but just in case you know right away). Looking at the status of libsrs2, I'm not very impressed. Also, we're a postfix site, and postfix seems to be very poorly supported wrt SRS. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] anyone from netstream (netvs.ch) listening here?
We've got a customer whose emails (from other people but filtered by us) are frequently being rejected by Netstreams harsh SPF-check. I've asked Netstream to add our servers to their whitelist, but nothing has happened. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] sms_client originator patch
Per Jessen wrote: it's a very simple patch: http://jessen.ch/files/smsclient-originator-patch Wow. That was obviously a very sought-after patch. Since my posting, my weblog has about 60 unique IP-addresses for just this patch :-) /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] sms_client originator patch
Andre Keller wrote: Hi swinoggers I'm searching for a possibility to set the originator in sms_client... (somewhere in ucp.c i asume). I saw in the mailinglist of smsclient, that Per Jessen wrote about that in August 2004. Are these patches still around? Yep, I've still got it somewhere. Give me a couple of minutes to find it. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] sms_client originator patch
Per Jessen wrote: it's a very simple patch: http://jessen.ch/files/smsclient-originator-patch Correction: http://jessen.ch/patches/smsclient-originator-patch /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] sms_client originator patch
Per Jessen wrote: Andre Keller wrote: Hi swinoggers I'm searching for a possibility to set the originator in sms_client... (somewhere in ucp.c i asume). I saw in the mailinglist of smsclient, that Per Jessen wrote about that in August 2004. Are these patches still around? Yep, I've still got it somewhere. Give me a couple of minutes to find it. Andre, it's a very simple patch: http://jessen.ch/files/smsclient-originator-patch Just change the from to whatever number you need. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Problems reaching large Websites
Mike Kellenberger wrote: Hi all Anbody else having problems to reach large websites, such as www.microsoft.com or www.dell.com? Problems in or to the akamai network? I've been unable to get to www.dell.ch since sometime yesterday at least. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: AW: [swinog] Problems reaching large Websites
Mike Kellenberger wrote: was ok a few minutes ago, now the problem is back... Access to dell.ch, ikea.com and sf.tv are now all fine from here (easynet). /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] Some of you might agree with this
I have just read and signed the online petition: Use free standards hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition service, at: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/lortow3/ I personally agree with what this petition says, and I think you might agree, too. If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider signing yourself. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] The truth about UCEPROTECT-Blocklists
Claus v. Wolfhausen wrote: Perhaps you don't know that i took over the UCEPROTECT-Project in June 2007, so if you had any problems with UCEPROTECT some years ago, then you had differences with my predecessor and not with me. Many things have changed here since i am responsible for the project. It does seem somewhat problematic that you would list someone for having a poorly configured auto-responder. How does that fit in with the blacklist policy for Level1? /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] The truth about UCEPROTECT-Blocklists
Tonnerre LOMBARD wrote: This has been a known problem for a long time already: http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/tools/detail.php?domain=gpstechnik.chsubmitted=1033063711table=abuse Sometimes I'm tempted to use rfc-ignorant.org as a blacklist. I know you won't, but be careful anyway - whois.rfc-ignorant also lists 165 TLDs (.dk, .de, .eu ...) due to no WHOIS server or incomplete data in server. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] green.ch rogue?
Bernhard Schmidt wrote: Hello everyone, we (AS12816, LRZ Leibniz Computing Centre Munich, a regional network for scientific and educational entities in the Munich area) are being hit by regular spamruns originated from 80.253.80.0/24 for several months now. This network belongs to We have seen the same throughout November, but nothing since 30nov. Unfortunately they are not listed on major RBLs yet because most of them seem not to accept submissions but rather rely on their own spamtraps. I've done some survey among the DENOG users and found that while some of the users have no hit at all, other destinations are heavily targetted. Users outside of the german speaking area don't seem to be affected at all. I'm trying to find a way to submit them to Spamhaus (which we have a paid feed for), but this might take some time. We use greylisting, which took care of all of it. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] gprs01.swisscom-mobile.ch. - 193.247.250.1
Benoit Panizzon wrote: They know perfectly well that masses of spam are being sent via gprs and that their ip is well blacklisted. I was pretty certain that was the case. Thanks. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] zyxel 2802 as bridge
Flavio Tischhauser wrote: On Nov 21, 2007 7:56 PM, Silvan Gebhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hello swinog has anyone collected experience with a zyxel 2802 ROuter used as modem (mode bridge)? I can't get it to work, with routing it finally works, but as bridge with my old good pfsense it won't work Have you tried contacting studerus support? They are very fast and extremely helpful. Yep, Studerus is good, but Zyxel is not always so good. Not always - I've been waiting for more than three years for a permanent fix for a Zyxel ADSL router. :-( /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] cybernet/swisscom - anti-spam measures and blacklists
Is anyone else getting emails rejected by cybernet/Swisscom with this message: 2007-11-14T09:54:49+0100 louiswu72 postfix1/error[8302]: 1FD0D2B0FA: to=nn, relay=none, delay=2.4, delays=2.4/0/0/0.01, dsn=4.0.0, status=deferred (delivery temporarily suspended: host mail.-.ch[212.90.199.8] refused to talk to me: 421-We are not currently accepting connections from 88.198.198.123. 421-Reason for temporary block: sending us spam 421 Please try again later. We're terminating this connection now.) /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] UCEProtect Blacklist (Update)
Markus Wild wrote: UCE Protect is one of those lists who suffer from a very odd sense of reality.. whoever uses that list to protect his mail servers must be aware that he'll get a lot of false positives (ie.valid mail won't get thru). No-one is likely to use uceprotect level3 to block emails, but they might very well use it for scoring. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] poor routing and VoIP latency issues
Mario Iseli wrote: Hi list :) Please try to use more significant subjects for the threads here... ACK. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
RE: [swinog] UCEProtect Blacklist -- join the club
Charles Buckley wrote: And then there is SORBS, which the ETH use, who have chosen to put the shared server I use for mail on a blacklist for some reason. mail.mauto.com is indeed listed by sorbs - I would check that your server hasn't been compromised. Look for traces of an ssh brute force attack perhaps. Everyone is going crazy about security, so you're likely to see a proliferation of providers offering to maintain blacklists, who will do it badly. There is already plenty of such lists - I don't think the number is likely to grow a awful lot. Much better would be to let the users determine what is spam and what is not, getting the ISP out of the role of having to play judge on a topic they don't master. Nah, leave the spam-filtering to us :-) The user and the ISP both have better things to do. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
RE: [swinog] UCEProtect Blacklist -- join the club
Per Jessen wrote: Charles Buckley wrote: And then there is SORBS, which the ETH use, who have chosen to put the shared server I use for mail on a blacklist for some reason. mail.mauto.com is indeed listed by sorbs - I would check that your server hasn't been compromised. Look for traces of an ssh brute force attack perhaps. Uh, sorry - I overlooked that you said shared. Well, according to SORBS, the server got listed because mail was sent to a spamtrap on 13 August. It could be one of your co-sharers ... if I were you, I'd talk to q-x.ch, and ask them what they're doing about it. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] UCEProtect Blacklist
Peter Keel wrote: * on the Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 02:00:15PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote: I would be interested to know why you find UCEprotect to be unreliable and unprofessional? Because of their delisting-procedure. How many networks will end up in there which have been sending spam at some time, but don't ever sent spam since then, because their admins fixed the problem, or the net got reassigned or whatever? UCEprotect level1 and -2 both include automatic delisting. Only level3 does not seem to have automatic delisting. With UCEprotect, I estimate about 30% of their entries being listed are such false positives, and this will of course raise and raise.. I ran some stats on our traffic (we use UCEprotect 1,2,3) for all of october - false positives per level: level1 = 0.75% level2 = 2.06% level3 = 0.96% (we have been using level3 experimentally for the last third of october) false positive = non-spam email sent by levelX listed server. Per Jessen -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] UCEProtect Blacklist
Xaver Aerni wrote: Is possible in the international Trafic you have less false positives. But here in Switzerland is it possble till 30 % false possitives Mails. Hello Xaver I have not looked at how much traffic we have coming from Sunrise (for example), but you're right - if we had lots of Sunrise traffic, we would also see more FPs from UCEprotect level3. From our point of view, it wouldn't change much as we only allocate 0.4 points for a level3 hit. I don't have any stats on how much international vs. how much Swiss traffic we have. Interesting question - I'll have to look into that. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] UCEProtect Blacklist
Daniel Kamm wrote: On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 21:46 +0100, Marco Meile wrote: We have some Problems with the UCEProtect.net blacklist. We considered UCEprotect as absolutely unreliable and unprofessional and are ignoring listings there. And I think so are 'the big swiss ones'. Hi Daniel, I would be interested to know why you find UCEprotect to be unreliable and unprofessional? IMO any postmaster who blockes mails upon one blacklist entry is ... (what was that polite description of moron?) ;) There is no shortage of incompetent postmasters and mail-admins. :-( /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] UCEProtect Blacklist
Xaver Aerni wrote: Wy is unproffesional, UCEprotect is blocking AS I think this isn't proffesional. Actually, UCEprotect is not blocking anything. They only provide the means for other people to do so. Anyone who uses UCEprotect level3 have been duly warned. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Kennt jemand das Uceprotect Spamliste
Xaver Aerni wrote: Did someone know the http://www.uceprotect.net/en/ I find it verry strong that they are blocking a complete AS in the Spam list. At the Moment is the Sunrise AS Blocked. It would be more correct to say that they are _listing_ an entire AS - after all, they're not blocking anything. We use uceprotect level1 and -2, but not for blocking, only scoring. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - your spam is our business. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Eines der ersten Urteile gegen Spamer ist draussen
Elvis Altherr wrote: Ok i agree to fight against spammers, but this is only a fight against windmills (it's my personel oppion) Perhaps to some degree - but in Denmark for instance, similar legislation has already led to heavy fines for a number of companies. Most recently a distributor got fined SFr5000 for sending out 5000 email invitations. (to existing or former customers). -- /Per Jessen, Zürich ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Skype
Xaver Aerni wrote: Sorry Yann, It isn't only the difference between Skype and Telco. Whe have had internal an old TVA (mechanic). Since 1 Year we have a Siemens Hicom system. The old is now running by my brother. and it is working fine. (since 10 years now) The Hicom, has everytimes problemes. Sometime the Phones doesn't ring etc. We moved to an Aastra box just before Christmas last year. Not a big one, 10-12 extensions. Before then end of January I had shifted everything to a box running Asterisk. Far more flexible. -- /Per Jessen, Zürich ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SMS alerting solution
Per Jessen wrote: Yes, that would be interesting - according to aspsms.ch: ASPSMS allows you to send SMS over the TCP/IP protocol from any program that can use ActiveX/OLE components ... We can't do ActiveX, but a command line php client would be quite useful. never mind, I've just found their email interface: http://www.aspsms.com/smtp/ -- /Per Jessen, Zürich ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SMS alerting solution
Patrick Feisthammel wrote: http://www.aspsms.ch/instruction/prices.asp They provide also a webservice interface which is very easy to use. A plus: reports about successful delivery of the sms. I can give you a perl and php client example which works with aspsms, if you are interested. Yes, that would be interesting - according to aspsms.ch: ASPSMS allows you to send SMS over the TCP/IP protocol from any program that can use ActiveX/OLE components ... We can't do ActiveX, but a command line php client would be quite useful. -- /Per Jessen, Zürich ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] spamhaus.org
Roger Buchwalder wrote: b] I don't unterstand admins who trust any lists 100% [(I _was_ one of them) Agree - the only lists I trust 100% are my own. c] I don't unterstand why _Spam_haus take care [about phishing (how about Phishinghaus?) Well, maybe they're geting bored and needed to think of something else to do :-) -- /Per Jessen, Zürich ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
