qmail Digest 11 Mar 1999 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 576
Topics (messages 22823 through 22857):
qmail-bounce
22823 by: "Brian T. Wightman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
force quoted-printable to 8bit
22824 by: Francisco Yepes Candel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22826 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fw: Your SMTP is about to be abused!
22825 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22834 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22837 by: Brad Shelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22843 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22844 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22850 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22856 by: Jenny Holmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
rblsmtpd not blocking
22827 by: torben fjerdingstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22830 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22832 by: torben fjerdingstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
xinetd & SMTP relay allowing
22828 by: Dustin Marquess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
new "attack" scheme
22829 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail + IMAP
22831 by: Jeff Hayward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22845 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22851 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22853 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22854 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Strange Phenomen with virtualdomains-file
22833 by: Joerg Toellner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22855 by: Joerg Toellner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qpopper vulnerability?
22835 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22838 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22846 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Queue in tmpfs
22836 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22842 by: "Peter C. Norton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
rcpthosts
22839 by: MountaiNet Tech Support <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22840 by: Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
preline and /bin/mail problem.
22841 by: Cristiano Lincoln Mattos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
implementing anti-SPAM policies in qmail
22847 by: Michael Graff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Filtering mails with file attachment
22848 by: David Lee Haw Ling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22849 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22852 by: David Lee Haw Ling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Virus Scan within qmail
22857 by: David Lee Haw Ling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Well,
It has been a while since I haved posted about or worked on my qmail-
bounce program. Becuase of other responsibilities (different job,
etc) I can no longer dedicate the time needed to develop or maintain
this program. If some kind soul would like to take over the
application, please let me know.
Brian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBNuZTMoVcmMo9wkyzEQIM7wCguUHH2M8kTGUF3UrGZoavNyun/tcAn1v5
xRsSRPomscR3WCxcRZPLI+Ha
=j8on
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Brian T. Wightman | Mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wightman | will result in the sender
at | being added to a mail
acm.org | blacklist. UCE bytes.
Hello,
Some questions.
1. It's possible force, in a qmail environement, the conversion of messages
encoded in quoted-printable to 8bit?
2. It's possible force the conversion only for certains destination mail
servers?
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francisco Yepes Candel e-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universidad de Murcia telf: +34-968-364828
Servicio de Inform�tica fax : +34-968-364151
30100 Murcia
Spain
Francisco Yepes Candel writes:
> Hello,
>
> Some questions.
>
> 1. It's possible force, in a qmail environement, the conversion of messages
> encoded in quoted-printable to 8bit?
Anything is possible, if you write the code to do it.
> 2. It's possible force the conversion only for certains destination mail
> servers?
Ditto.
Right now, there are no facilities to convert quoted-printable encodings to
8bit within Qmail. Furthermore, there are no facilities within Qmail to do
anything based on destination domains.
The only thing you can do is use virtualdomains, smtproutes, and some
.qmail files to send all mail for a specific domain to some other machine
that you've set aside, which will run your custom mail conversion before
forwarding the mail to the real domain.
--
Sam
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Markus Stumpf wrote:
> If you patch qmail-smtpd to keep (centralized) track on incoming connections
> per time period and lock out those which are over some threshold this
> will probably work as long as you are not a bigger site with many users
> subscribed to a mailing list that is distributed via qmail.
> In the latter case you'll probably notice a similar behaviour.
Yeah, but at times that could lock this list out. :)
Why not keep track of how many rcpt-to's on a connections (that's what I
understand the thing does) and at a certain point start teergrubing it.
If it persists beyond another number after that you can either lock it
out altogether or send it a land or something like that. :)
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
Rick McMillin writes:
> Does anyone know of any good reasons as to why QMail is better
> suited to handle this attack?
Certainly something like this could happen. And yes, it would be a
serious PITA because spammers rarely use a valid envelope sender, so
the mail would all double-bounce. However, the whole point behind
this program is for a spammer to use the information provided by
rcpt-to to *avoid* having to send mail to every word in their
dictionary. Since qmail doesn't provide any information, the first
qmail site a spammer picks on will suck down all of their emailing
capability, and they won't be successful in spamming, to the extent
that spamming achieves any success.
> >In both cases on your server, if you're attacked, it will respond with a
> >positive (or semi-positive in the case of vrfy) answer for EVERY word in
> >their dictionary. Let's say they have a 500,000 word dictionary (I have no
> >idea what size they use). Shortly after the harvesting attack, you're going
> >to get 500,000 spams flooding into your mailserver (or more likely 5000
> >messages with 100 BCC: recipients each?).
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 06:27:14PM -0000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Rick McMillin writes:
> > Does anyone know of any good reasons as to why QMail is better
> > suited to handle this attack?
>
This whole thread has me wondering. I had a site start hitting on my smtp
port a week or so ago. It just kept hitting the port, but didn't appear to
be actually trying to negotiate any protocol transfers. There was no mail from
or rcpt to, yet they just kept hitting the port, twice per second.
If I killed qmail-smtp and restarted, they would immediately jump over to
the backup MX and start the same process.
The problems I had with it seemed only two, filling up my syslog and hogging
the smtp port, slowing down legitimate smtp activity.
I ended up blocking them at the router.
I wonder if this was in any way related to this rcpt to attack?
--
Brad Shelton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Line Exchange http://ole.net
Detroit News http://detnews.com
Russell Nelson writes:
> the mail would all double-bounce. However, the whole point behind
> this program is for a spammer to use the information provided by
> rcpt-to to *avoid* having to send mail to every word in their
> dictionary. Since qmail doesn't provide any information, the first
> qmail site a spammer picks on will suck down all of their emailing
> capability, and they won't be successful in spamming, to the extent
> that spamming achieves any success.
I am not particularly concerned with how succesfull the spammer's spam run
is. Frankly, I really don't care. My own concerns and priorities take
precedence.
Therefore, I am asked a whether receiving about a thousand separate
messages, with an average of a hundred recipients each, most of them
invalid, generating a hundred thousand separates bounces that I must
mailbomb the forged sender with (and, if the forged domain's mail server is
properly configured, mailbomb myself instead), is a price I'm willing to
pay in order to make some trailer park trash's spam run less succesfull, by
some marginal amount.
The answer to me seems to be pretty clear -- it's not. You are assuming
that the spammer will realize that something is wrong.
Nope. Ninety nine times out of a hundred it won't. They're stupid, dumb,
and they have only a vague idea how SMTP works. They fire up the
harvest-o-matic, go to sleep, wake up in the morning, and piss all over
themselves seeing how many valid addresses the harvest-o-matic has
collected. With dollar signs in their eyes over the prospect of making
riches from selling golf balls, or laundry detergents, to this
highly-targeted audience, they'll simply take the file with the addresses,
and plug it into the Super Stealth Cloak-O Blastomatic 2000 Express Mail
Disseminator.
--
Sam
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 03:03:23PM -0500, Brad Shelton wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 06:27:14PM -0000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > Rick McMillin writes:
> > > Does anyone know of any good reasons as to why QMail is better
> > > suited to handle this attack?
> >
>
> This whole thread has me wondering. I had a site start hitting on my smtp
> port a week or so ago. It just kept hitting the port, but didn't appear to
> be actually trying to negotiate any protocol transfers. There was no mail from
> or rcpt to, yet they just kept hitting the port, twice per second.
One site, mtshasta.snowcrest.net, connects to my port 25 every once in a while
(sometimes with more than a month in between) and doesn't seem to deliver anything..
Anybody seen this too?
Greetz, Peter.
--
.| Peter van Dijk | <mo|VERWEG> stoned worden of coden
.| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | <mo|VERWEG> dat is de levensvraag
| <mo|VERWEG> coden of stoned worden
| <mo|VERWEG> stonend worden En coden
| <mo|VERWEG> hmm
| <mo|VERWEG> dan maar stoned worden en slashdot lezen:)
Sam writes:
> Russell Nelson writes:
>
> > the mail would all double-bounce. However, the whole point behind
> > this program is for a spammer to use the information provided by
> > rcpt-to to *avoid* having to send mail to every word in their
> > dictionary. Since qmail doesn't provide any information, the first
> > qmail site a spammer picks on will suck down all of their emailing
> > capability, and they won't be successful in spamming, to the extent
> > that spamming achieves any success.
>
> I am not particularly concerned with how succesfull the spammer's spam run
> is. Frankly, I really don't care. My own concerns and priorities take
> precedence.
I don't care either. However, the spammer will. And them pursing
their own interests will ensure that qmail sites will not suffer.
Brad Shelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This whole thread has me wondering. I had a site start hitting on my
> smtp port a week or so ago. It just kept hitting the port, but
> didn't appear to be actually trying to negotiate any protocol
> transfers. There was no mail from or rcpt to, yet they just kept
> hitting the port, twice per second.
>
When we've had that problem, it's been because the sending server
has been trying to use LF instead of CRLF. Patching happens...
/Jenny Holmberg
I have verified that orbs's host are not blocked with my
setup. I dont see what's wrong. What exactly should I do?
Also: Can I get denials logged?
Here is my complete startup script (AIX-4.2.1):
/usr/local/bin/supervise /usr/local/qmail/supervise/qmail-send env - \
PATH="/usr/local/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
TZ=MET-1METDST,M3.5.0,M10.5.0 \
qmail-start ./Mailbox /usr/local/bin/accustamp|/usr/local/bin/setuser qm aill
\
/usr/local/bin/cyclog -s100004000 -n2 /var/adm/maillog qmail &
/usr/local/bin/supervise /usr/local/qmail/supervise/tcpserver env - \
PATH="/usr/local/bin:$PATH" TZ=MET-1METDST,M3.5.0,M10.5.0 \
tcpserver -x /usr/local/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
-v -p -t 5 -c 400 -b 40 -u 203 -g 200 0 \
smtp /usr/local/bin/smtplog \
/usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrelays.orbs.org -rrbl.maps.vix.com \
/usr/local/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 \
| /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
| /usr/local/bin/cyclog -s100004000 -n2 /var/adm/smtpd smtpd 3 &
--
Med venlig hilsen / Regards
Netdriftgruppen / Network Management Group
UNI-C
Tlf./Phone +45 35 87 89 41 Mail: UNI-C
Fax. +45 35 87 89 90 Bygning 304
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DK-2800 Lyngby
You cannot specify two separate -r parameters to 1 instance of rblsmtpd.
You must run two separate rblsmtpd instances. The first one runs the
second.
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, torben fjerdingstad wrote:
> I have verified that orbs's host are not blocked with my
> setup. I dont see what's wrong. What exactly should I do?
> Also: Can I get denials logged?
>
> Here is my complete startup script (AIX-4.2.1):
>
> /usr/local/bin/supervise /usr/local/qmail/supervise/qmail-send env - \
> PATH="/usr/local/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
> TZ=MET-1METDST,M3.5.0,M10.5.0 \
> qmail-start ./Mailbox /usr/local/bin/accustamp|/usr/local/bin/setuser qm
>aill \
> /usr/local/bin/cyclog -s100004000 -n2 /var/adm/maillog qmail &
>
> /usr/local/bin/supervise /usr/local/qmail/supervise/tcpserver env - \
> PATH="/usr/local/bin:$PATH" TZ=MET-1METDST,M3.5.0,M10.5.0 \
> tcpserver -x /usr/local/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
> -v -p -t 5 -c 400 -b 40 -u 203 -g 200 0 \
> smtp /usr/local/bin/smtplog \
> /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrelays.orbs.org -rrbl.maps.vix.com \
This should be 2 rblsmtpd calls:
/usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -r relays.orbs.org \
/usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd \
(The -r rbl.maps.vix.com is not needed.)
> /usr/local/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 \
> | /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
> | /usr/local/bin/cyclog -s100004000 -n2 /var/adm/smtpd smtpd 3 &
>
> --
> Med venlig hilsen / Regards
> Netdriftgruppen / Network Management Group
> UNI-C
>
> Tlf./Phone +45 35 87 89 41 Mail: UNI-C
> Fax. +45 35 87 89 90 Bygning 304
> E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DK-2800 Lyngby
>
>
---------------------------------
Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Administrator
localconnect(sm)
http://www.localconnect.net/
The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/
One Monroeville Center, Suite 850
Monroeville, PA 15146
(412) 810-8888 Phone
(412) 810-8886 Fax
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 11:00:04AM -0500, Timothy L. Mayo wrote:
> You cannot specify two separate -r parameters to 1 instance of rblsmtpd.
> You must run two separate rblsmtpd instances. The first one runs the
> second.
Clumsy. But it works now, with two instances of rblsmtpd.
Thanks to all.
> On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, torben fjerdingstad wrote:
>
> > I have verified that orbs's host are not blocked with my
> > setup. I dont see what's wrong. What exactly should I do?
> > Also: Can I get denials logged?
> >
> > Here is my complete startup script (AIX-4.2.1):
[ cut ]
> > /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrelays.orbs.org -rrbl.maps.vix.com \
>
> This should be 2 rblsmtpd calls:
>
> /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -r relays.orbs.org \
> /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd \
>
> (The -r rbl.maps.vix.com is not needed.)
>
> > /usr/local/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 \
> > | /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
> > | /usr/local/bin/cyclog -s100004000 -n2 /var/adm/smtpd smtpd 3 &
> ---------------------------------
> Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Senior Systems Administrator
> localconnect(sm)
> http://www.localconnect.net/
--
Med venlig hilsen / Regards
Netdriftgruppen / Network Management Group
UNI-C
Tlf./Phone +45 35 87 89 41 Mail: UNI-C
Fax. +45 35 87 89 90 Bygning 304
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DK-2800 Lyngby
On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Czeh Istvan wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm running qmail-smtpd from xinetd, and now I need to allow SMTP relay for
> the localhost.
>
> I've read FAQ 5.4, and I configured xinetd like this:
>
> service smtp
> {
> socket_type = stream
> protocol = tcp
> wait = no
> instances = 32
> flags = REUSE
> user = qmaild
> server = /usr/sbin/tcpd
> server_args = /usr/local/qmail/bin/tcp-env /usr/local/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
> }
>
> In /etc/hosts.allow the RELAYCLIENT has been set:
>
> tcp-env: 127.0.0.1 , 193.6.41.140 : setenv RELAYCLIENT
>
>
> After all this if I try to telnet to the smtp port, qmail-smtpd doesn't
> respond:
>
> % telnet localhost 25
> Trying 193.6.41.140...
> Connected to hal2000.hal.vein.hu.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> ^]
> telnet>
tcpd doesn't work as-is w/ xinetd.
tcpd relies on tcpd's ability to let you define argv[0].
xinetd defines this for you.
The easiest "fix" is to advance the argv pointer (argv++;) in
the main() function for tcpd, to get rid of of argv[0]. I've been
running tcpd under xinetd like that for years now.
-Dustin
Markus Stumpf writes:
> There is an "address collector" program that works with a dictionary
> of username appends the domain and uses RCPT TO to collect what it
> thinks are valid email addresses.
Yup. Someone asked about it at my ISP/F qmail tutorial on Sunday (I
just got back today). It has no effect on qmail, since qmail-smtpd
responds "250 ok" to every address. I expect that this address
collector has special-case code for qmail which causes it to discard
these false positives.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Manfred Spraul wrote:
I know that this is partially off-topic, but does anyone know how
reliable the Maildir support in qmail-imap (the imap server from UW, the
Maildir patches from Mattias Larsson) is?
I use it in heavy production but I've made fairly extensive changes
to it. Most of the changes were to use a different scheme for
storing UIDs (stat()-ing each file to obtain the UID is a very heavy
penalty), as well as caching flag updates until a checkpoint call,
also for performance. I seem to recall fixing some bugs but I
don't honestly know whether they were mine or someone else's.
I keep meaning to throw it out and start fresh, but haven't ever got
'round tuit.
-- Jeff
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 10:01:51AM -0600, Jeff Hayward wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>
> I know that this is partially off-topic, but does anyone know how
> reliable the Maildir support in qmail-imap (the imap server from UW, the
> Maildir patches from Mattias Larsson) is?
>
> I use it in heavy production but I've made fairly extensive changes
> to it. Most of the changes were to use a different scheme for
> storing UIDs (stat()-ing each file to obtain the UID is a very heavy
> penalty), as well as caching flag updates until a checkpoint call,
> also for performance. I seem to recall fixing some bugs but I
> don't honestly know whether they were mine or someone else's.
>
> I keep meaning to throw it out and start fresh, but haven't ever got
> 'round tuit.
Wasn't Russell working on a Maildir-IMAP?
Greetz, Peter.
--
.| Peter van Dijk | <mo|VERWEG> stoned worden of coden
.| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | <mo|VERWEG> dat is de levensvraag
| <mo|VERWEG> coden of stoned worden
| <mo|VERWEG> stonend worden En coden
| <mo|VERWEG> hmm
| <mo|VERWEG> dan maar stoned worden en slashdot lezen:)
Peter van Dijk writes:
>
> Wasn't Russell working on a Maildir-IMAP?
>
Yup. A Maildir/checkpassword IMAP. Got bogged down in the innards of
IMAP.
On Thu, Mar 11, 1999 at 03:33:23AM -0000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Peter van Dijk writes:
> >
> > Wasn't Russell working on a Maildir-IMAP?
> >
>
> Yup. A Maildir/checkpassword IMAP. Got bogged down in the innards of
> IMAP.
Hmm.. and when do you think it'll be finished?
Hmm.. better question: when will any code of that be released? :)
Greetz, Peter.
--
.| Peter van Dijk | <mo|VERWEG> stoned worden of coden
.| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | <mo|VERWEG> dat is de levensvraag
| <mo|VERWEG> coden of stoned worden
| <mo|VERWEG> stonend worden En coden
| <mo|VERWEG> hmm
| <mo|VERWEG> dan maar stoned worden en slashdot lezen:)
On Thu, Mar 11, 1999 at 03:33:23AM -0000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Peter van Dijk writes:
> >
> > Wasn't Russell working on a Maildir-IMAP?
> >
>
> Yup. A Maildir/checkpassword IMAP. Got bogged down in the innards of
> IMAP.
Hmm.. there's something weird in your headers:
Received: from ns.crynwr.com (192.203.178.14)
by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 11 Mar 1999 03:32:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 23819 invoked by uid 0); 11 Mar 1999 03:33:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO desk.crynwr.com) (205.232.69.125)
by ns.crynwr.com with SMTP; 11 Mar 1999 03:33:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 22700 invoked by uid 501); 11 Mar 1999 03:33:23 -0000
Date: 11 Mar 1999 03:33:23 -0000
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Why the hell is qmail running as root on ns.crynwr.com?
Greetz, Peter.
--
.| Peter van Dijk | <mo|VERWEG> stoned worden of coden
.| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | <mo|VERWEG> dat is de levensvraag
| <mo|VERWEG> coden of stoned worden
| <mo|VERWEG> stonend worden En coden
| <mo|VERWEG> hmm
| <mo|VERWEG> dan maar stoned worden en slashdot lezen:)
Hi all,
i am settiup up a Communication-Server under SUSE Linux 6.0. For the
Email-Services i decided to take the great qmail.
I installed qmail and tested it locally within our LAN from a
Windows-Client to another office with a window client. And it works
veeeeeeery fine.
Now comes the story with the remote-mail in vicinity. As we use a
dialup-connection to our ISP to deliver and receive our internet-emails i
installed ucspi-tcp and serialmail. All compiled and checks successfully.
Now how to setup? I searched the FAQ, the man pages, the docfiles and at
last the qmail-mailing-list-archive. I found several RE:s to the same
question and followed a well written step by step solution to set up
serialmail to relay the mails until a ip-layer comes up.
Now the problem began:
i made a maildir for my outbound mail in the alias-dir of qmail named
"outbound" (Owner is alias / group is qmail).
Next i created a .qmail-outbound-default file (Same owner and group as the
maildir) with "./outbound" as its contents.
i set up a virtualdomains file in /var/qmail/control and insert a
"catchall-alias" as i want ALL outbound (not the localmaeil of course) mail
go to this maildir to deliver it later via "maildirsmtp".
My virtualdomainsfile looks like this:
---------TOF----------
:alias-outbound
---------EOF----------
(tried: :outbound too!)
Now comes the first test...Oops my mails dont appear in the "outbound"-dir.
Okay...lets try a reboot and restart qmail....
SURPRISE! qmail wont come up at startup!!! (I never changed the startup
files...so why?)...
Tried to start qmail manually...Sorry....NO QMAIL processes (no rspawn,
lspawn, clean a.s.o).
Hmmmmmmmmm.....
Read all docs again...go through all again and again...
Last i noticed sth. strange...
If i move my virtualdomains file out of /var/qmail/control qmail comes up
when i start it manually and at startup of the system.
Moving the virtualdomains file back on its right place and qmail wont start
again. Tried it multi and ever the same effect. If qmail detects the
virtualdomains file it wont start. Without it local mail works well.
No i am at the end of my wisdom!
Please can s.o. help?
What do i wrong?
Is there a mistake in my virtualdomains file?
Any hint appreciated!
Please answer in the mailing list (i joined today) or direct email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I hope i explained my problem clearly to you. But if you need some more
detailed information to help me plz. dont hesitate to mail me.
Sorry! Im not a UNIX-Expert and my explanations may sound somehow funny or
lame to you but i tried my very best!
Thx. in advance very very much!
CYA
Joerg
Sorry in advance!
Im not sure if my first posting comes up in the mailinglist, as i noticed i
have the address "qmail-help@..." in the To-header.
If this re-posting now is a double:
Sorry for your inconvinience! Dont blame me plz. Thx.
Original-Msg was:
--------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
i am settiup up a Communication-Server under SUSE Linux 6.0. For the
Email-Services i decided to take the great qmail.
I installed qmail and tested it locally within our LAN from a
Windows-Client to another office with a window client. And it works
veeeeeeery fine.
Now comes the story with the remote-mail in vicinity. As we use a
dialup-connection to our ISP to deliver and receive our internet-emails i
installed ucspi-tcp and serialmail. All compiled and checks successfully.
Now how to setup? I searched the FAQ, the man pages, the docfiles and at
last the qmail-mailing-list-archive. I found several RE:s to the same
question and followed a well written step by step solution to set up
serialmail to relay the mails until a ip-layer comes up.
Now the problem began:
i made a maildir for my outbound mail in the alias-dir of qmail named
"outbound" (Owner is alias / group is qmail).
Next i created a .qmail-outbound-default file (Same owner and group as the
maildir) with "./outbound" as its contents.
i set up a virtualdomains file in /var/qmail/control and insert a
"catchall-alias" as i want ALL outbound (not the localmaeil of course) mail
go to this maildir to deliver it later via "maildirsmtp".
My virtualdomainsfile looks like this:
---------TOF----------
:alias-outbound
---------EOF----------
(tried: :outbound too!)
Now comes the first test...Oops my mails dont appear in the "outbound"-dir.
Okay...lets try a reboot and restart qmail....
SURPRISE! qmail wont come up at startup!!! (I never changed the startup
files...so why?)...
Tried to start qmail manually...Sorry....NO QMAIL processes (no rspawn,
lspawn, clean a.s.o).
Hmmmmmmmmm.....
Read all docs again...go through all again and again...
Last i noticed sth. strange...
If i move my virtualdomains file out of /var/qmail/control qmail comes up
when i start it manually and at startup of the system.
Moving the virtualdomains file back on its right place and qmail wont start
again. Tried it multi and ever the same effect. If qmail detects the
virtualdomains file it wont start. Without it local mail works well.
No i am at the end of my wisdom!
Please can s.o. help?
What do i wrong?
Is there a mistake in my virtualdomains file?
Any hint appreciated!
Please answer in the mailing list (i joined today) or direct email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I hope i explained my problem clearly to you. But if you need some more
detailed information to help me plz. dont hesitate to mail me.
Sorry! Im not a UNIX-Expert and my explanations may sound somehow funny or
lame to you but i tried my very best!
Thx. in advance very very much!
CYA
Joerg
CYA
Joerg
Aaron L. Meehan writes:
> Well, the qmail popbull patch works a bit differently, since it counts
> on the access time of the user's Maildir vs the creation time of the
> actual bulletin file to determine whether they should get the bulletin
> (as far as I can remember).
And as it turns out, that's insufficient to the task.
> One drawback of the ~/.popbull method would be a few thousand more
> inodes used.. among other things.
Actually, an empty file isn't assigned an inode. It's just a
directory entry.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
Multiple people write:
> >Actually, an empty file isn't assigned an inode. It's just a
> >directory entry.
>
> Wanna bet?
What was I thinking of?? Disk space?? I'm trying a new ergo
keyboard, yeah, that must be the excuse....
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 08:29:12PM -0000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Multiple people write:
> > >Actually, an empty file isn't assigned an inode. It's just a
> > >directory entry.
> >
> > Wanna bet?
>
> What was I thinking of?? Disk space?? I'm trying a new ergo
> keyboard, yeah, that must be the excuse....
Well I think you're showing your knowledge of the FAT system. The concept of an empty
file in my mind is still that of a directory entry pointing to cluster (or was it
sector? :) 0, even after 4 years of heavy Unix usage.
Greetz, Peter.
--
.| Peter van Dijk | <mo|VERWEG> stoned worden of coden
.| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | <mo|VERWEG> dat is de levensvraag
| <mo|VERWEG> coden of stoned worden
| <mo|VERWEG> stonend worden En coden
| <mo|VERWEG> hmm
| <mo|VERWEG> dan maar stoned worden en slashdot lezen:)
Paul Watkins writes:
> I'm operating a system that doesn't need the reliability that queueing
> affords - speed is all that counts, because after 10 minutes any email that
> hasn't gotten out is out-of-date and worthless - such is the unique nature
> of our system. Since I've got to get out 10,000 emails in a few minutes,
> I'm finding that the hard disk is the massive bottleneck in achieving this.
> I'm running Solaris and am looking at the possibility of having the queue on
> tmpfs so it's in RAM. Of course, on reboot or crash the directory structure
> would be gone.. how much of this directory structure does qmail expect to
> find, and how much of it will it create on the fly? Any other suggestions?
I don't think you want to use vanilla qmail, then. Sounds more like
you need a custom program which talks to qmail-lspawn and hands them
all the same file.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
> > I'm running Solaris and am looking at the possibility of having the queue on
> > tmpfs so it's in RAM. Of course, on reboot or crash the directory structure
> > would be gone.. how much of this directory structure does qmail expect to
> > find, and how much of it will it create on the fly? Any other suggestions?
All of it. I think if you're going to put the queue on tmpfs then you
will probably want to run a "make setup" from the qmail source
directory each time your reboot, as part of your rc script.
You should also make sure you don't mount it nosuid.
-Peter
I recently setup a new mail server using qmail but am having a few problems
with my rcpthosts file. The machine is named edwin.mounet.com. It needs
to receive mail for mounet.com so I added the MX record to point to
edwin.mounet.com. mounet.com is also a CNAME for edwin.mounet.com. Does
mounet.com need to be in rcpthosts also or just edwin.mounet.com? Some of
our users are having problems sending to a few domains, if this file was
setup wrong could that coz the problem? Also several people are asking why
their e-mail appears as [EMAIL PROTECTED] when they send, what can I do
to resolve this? Thanks for your help
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 03:25:18PM -0500, MountaiNet Tech Support wrote:
> I recently setup a new mail server using qmail but am having a few problems
> with my rcpthosts file. The machine is named edwin.mounet.com. It needs
> to receive mail for mounet.com so I added the MX record to point to
> edwin.mounet.com. mounet.com is also a CNAME for edwin.mounet.com. Does
> mounet.com need to be in rcpthosts also or just edwin.mounet.com? Some of
> our users are having problems sending to a few domains, if this file was
> setup wrong could that coz the problem? Also several people are asking why
> their e-mail appears as [EMAIL PROTECTED] when they send, what can I do
> to resolve this? Thanks for your help
Remove the CNAME record for mounet.com that points to edwin.mounet.com. That
hides the MX record, and MTAs will (might?) rewrite [EMAIL PROTECTED] to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Make the CNAME record an A record.
Chris
I have qmail 1.03 on a Sparc with Solaris 2.5.1. For various
reasons, we had to stick with mailboxes in /var/spool/mail, and use
the following as a qmail-start script:
exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
qmail-start \
'|preline -f /bin/mail -f "${SENDER:-MAILER-DAEMON}" -d "$USER"' \
splogger qmail
Nearly everything works fine... people get their mail delivered,
but every now and then, delivery would fail, with this in the log:
Mar 10 09:43:51 netralink qmail: delivery 559: failure:
mail:_Temporary_file_problem/mail:_Mail_saved_in_dead.letter/
preline:_fatal:_unable_to_copy_input:_broken_pipe/did_0+0+1/
The only thing in common about the messages that failed were that
most had big attachments. Searching the list, i saw that this usually
happened when the program reading from preline stopped before the end of
preline's output. The sugessted fix was to add an "|| exit 0" to the end
of the preline invocation, above... i done that, and the messages
continued to fail, with the following:
Mar 10 16:01:38 netralink qmail: delivery 142: success:
mail:_Temporary_file_problem/mail:_Mail_saved_in_dead.letter/did_0+0+1/
Only the preline part of the error went away (or was not being
logged anymore).
The dead.letter is saved on the user's homedir, with size 0.
We've never had this type of problem with sendmail before, using /bin/mail
as a delivery agent.
Anyone have a fix for this?
Thanks,
Cristiano Lincoln Mattos
System Administrator - Hotlink
Francisco Yepes Candel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. reject all the messages with origin (dirIP) AND destination (rcpt) out
> of my domain
This is done by allowing your IP addresses to connect (via a rule in
/etc/hosts.allow, tcpserver, or whatever you use to run qmail-smtpd --
I use NetBSD's inetd, which does tcpwrapper stuff internally)
> 2. reject all the messages with a envelope sender "unqualified" (without
> domain)
I have code that does this, I think.
> 3. reject all the messages with a envelope sender "unresolvable" (in
> DNS)
I know I have code that does this.
> 4. accept the rest
I go a little further.
I check the MAPS RBL and MAPS DUL (see http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ and
http://maps.vix.com/dul/ for info) to see if the incoming IP address
is on either of those lists. For the RBL, mail is rejected. For the
DUL, a X-Spam-Warning: line is added to let users figgure out what
they might want to do with it.
I also do regular expression matching on header lines.
See http://www.flame.org/qmail/ for info. (I'll be updating this in a
few minutes, it'll be SLIGHTLY out of date until then.)
--Michael
Hi,
There is much talk about filtering out spammers. Is there a way to filter out
mails with file attachment? Particularly .exe file?
Thanks.
Regards,
hawling lee
David Lee Haw Ling writes:
> Hi,
>
> There is much talk about filtering out spammers. Is there a way to filter out
> mails with file attachment? Particularly .exe file?
Just round-file all mail that has a Content-Type: multipart header. Keep
in mind that this will also round-file stuff that people will send you in
HTML. Which may or may not be an added bonus.
--
Sam
Round-file? How?
I am not talking about filtering at the email client's end but at qmail server.
Thanks.
Sam wrote:
> David Lee Haw Ling writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > There is much talk about filtering out spammers. Is there a way to filter out
> > mails with file attachment? Particularly .exe file?
>
> Just round-file all mail that has a Content-Type: multipart header. Keep
> in mind that this will also round-file stuff that people will send you in
> HTML. Which may or may not be an added bonus.
>
> --
> Sam
Hi,
What's the tweaking needed on AMaViS to work on Qmail?
Thanks.
.hllee
Sascha Ottolski wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> don't know if this is a better solution, but this is a different solution. It
> needs a little tweaking to work with qmail, and (as far as I made it work)
> scans only incoming mails based on the users .qmail-file. I can send you our
> version if you are interested.
>
> See http://satan.oih.rwth-aachen.de/AMaViS/ for details.
>
> Greetings, Sascha
