qmail Digest 15 Dec 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1214
Topics (messages 54015 through 54084):
Re: VPOPMAIL Problem
54015 by: Hubbard, David
54023 by: Milen Petrinski
54067 by: Sean Reifschneider
Re: Running qmail-pop3d as non-root user
54016 by: Gjermund Sorseth
Re: Changing double bounce sender from #@[] to anything else
54017 by: Charles Cazabon
54019 by: Jonathan McDowell
54030 by: Kris Kelley
Re: Converting from vpopmail to vmailmgr
54018 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: rblsmtpd conflict with ucspi -tcp
54020 by: Alex Pennace
54021 by: Charles Cazabon
qmail problems?
54022 by: rdrake.telusplanet.net
54024 by: Charles Cazabon
54025 by: Alex Pennace
54026 by: rdrake.telusplanet.net
Re: LDAP with qmail !!!! almost ok !!!!
54027 by: Marcio Sa
54029 by: Olivier M.
54069 by: Henning Brauer
Re: Smtp AUTH
54028 by: Kris Kelley
ipchains + qmail + vmailmgr
54031 by: Mark Lo
Loop protection
54032 by: Laurence Brockman
54033 by: Greg Owen
Looking for way to delete all mail sent to a non-existent mailbox
54034 by: David Geller
54035 by: Greg Owen
54038 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
Dynamic relay question
54036 by: rmarcos
54039 by: Kris Kelley
54042 by: Charles Cazabon
Hy.....
54037 by: Seby
54040 by: Andy Bradford
54041 by: Mark Delany
54043 by: Seby
How ezmlm works with mysql databases.
54044 by: Fernando Costa de Almeida
54070 by: Henning Brauer
Re: Copy Outbound messages
54045 by: Charrua
54061 by: Peter Samuel
RE : RE : Smtp AUTH
54046 by: Charles Trtanj
slow?
54047 by: richard morris
different kind of rblsmtpd
54048 by: Markus Stumpf
54076 by: andrew.tic.ch
Concurrent access to one mailbox via IMAP?
54049 by: Marc Knoop
54050 by: Peter Green
54054 by: Charles Cazabon
54060 by: Marc Knoop
54065 by: Greg Owen
RBL gone crazy?
54051 by: asantos
54068 by: Edward S. Marshall
qmail server communication
54052 by: gmo.gmx.de
54055 by: Charles Cazabon
location of virtual domains mail.
54053 by: Peter Brezny
54057 by: Charles Cazabon
Mail flood in queue
54056 by: Sam Laffere
54059 by: Charles Cazabon
54062 by: Markus Stumpf
54063 by: Mark Delany
Re: RE : Smtp AUTH
54058 by: Kris Kelley
54064 by: Charles Trtanj
Re: a problem about hostname/virtual domain
54066 by: qmail.col7.metta.lk
Bare CRLF's and 'email floods'
54071 by: CK
54072 by: Ian Lance Taylor
54073 by: andrew.tic.ch
54074 by: Markus Stumpf
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
54075 by: Marc-Adrian Napoli
54082 by: hari_bhr
Re: Does qmail really delay a bounce for this long?
54077 by: Matt Harrington
emulating sendmail's [EMAIL PROTECTED] feature?
54078 by: Matt Harrington
54079 by: Alex Pennace
54080 by: Mark Delany
54081 by: Matt Harrington
How to add banner/image
54083 by: Paulus Hendarwan
1 000 000 USD to get me rid of my utter frustration
54084 by: Franck PORCHER
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just go to the domain directory and type this: echo "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > .qmail-default That means any email that comes in to that domain addressed to a nonexistent address will be handled by the .qmail-default since a .qmail-username for that address won't exist. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Jesus Arnaiz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 2:54 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: VPOPMAIL Problem Hi Everyone! I use qmail as my MTA and I have vpopmail installed. The problem is I create a virtualdomain with virtual users and I want to do this: All e-mail sent to a pop user put the mail in the Maildir of the user, and all e-mail sent to an address which do not exists like ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) should be sent to an external address ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). I do this: I create the popusers. ----.qmail-default------ | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------ ----.qmail-postmaster--- &[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------ I think this should work but all e-mail I send goes to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" Can anybody help me?. Thanks in advance -- Jes�s Arn�iz Departamento de Sistemas ARCOMEDIA.COM
> Hi Everyone! > > I use qmail as my MTA and I have vpopmail installed. The problem is I create > a virtualdomain with virtual users and I want to do this: All e-mail sent > to a pop user put the mail in the Maildir of the user, and all e-mail sent to > an address which do not exists like ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) should be sent to > an external address ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). I do this: > > I create the popusers. > > ----.qmail-default------ > | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------------------------ > You can put there the e-mail adress to deliver mail to (as described in the docs), even if it is remote, but you need "" instead of ". Milen
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 07:37:10AM -0500, Hubbard, David wrote: >Just go to the domain directory and type this: > >echo "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > .qmail-default > >That means any email that comes in to that domain >addressed to a nonexistent address will be handled >by the .qmail-default since a .qmail-username for >that address won't exist. Except that vpopmail doesn't use a .qmail-username for user accounts. Everything gets delivered to .qmail-default and the vpopmail dispatcher does the appropirate thing there. Perhaps not the right way, but my first thought is: mv .qmail-default .qmail-<localuser> echo '&[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >.qmail-default That should allow mail for <localuser> to come in and be handled, while sending the rest of the mail elsewhere. Sean -- I didn't spend 6 years in evil medical school to be called *MISTER* Evil! -- Dr. Evil, _Austin_Powers:_International_Man_of_Mystery_ Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
> Laurence Brockman writes: > > Is there any reason why I couldn't run qmail-pop3d as a non-root user? > Using tcpserver to start the process I could easily set it to run as a > qmail user (Or yet another user, with almost no permissions). Is this > possible? And if so, is there anything that I should be looking out for? If you use checkpassword, there are two reasons why tcpserver must be started as root: 1) checkpassword needs root priveliges to call setgroups() to set supplementary groups. 2) If you use shadow password files, checkpassword needs root proveliges to read them. (And of course, if your mail users have different UID's, checkpassword needs root priveliges to switch its UID to the user logging in before it starts qmail-pop3d.) If you use a replacement checkpassword, tcpserver may or may not be started as an unpriveliged user depending on what the checkpassword replacement needs to do. -- Gjermund Sorseth
Laurence Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a way to do this easily? I want to change the Mail from address of > double bounces from #@[] to something like [EMAIL PROTECTED] You'll have to edit the qmail source to do this. However, you probably shouldn't -- double bounces have to have a null envelope sender, so that if they are going to bounce, they get thrown away -- if you change it to something non-null, the receiving SMTP daemon can't tell it's a double-bounce, and will bounce it, resulting in a triple-bounce, which should never happen. If _that_ host also uses something non-null for envelope sender, it could theoretically bounce forever. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 08:21:29AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: > Laurence Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is there a way to do this easily? I want to change the Mail from address of > > double bounces from #@[] to something like [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You'll have to edit the qmail source to do this. However, you probably > shouldn't -- double bounces have to have a null envelope sender, so that > if they are going to bounce, they get thrown away -- if you change it to FWIW if you turn on the "sender_verify" option for Exim it thinks it can't route mail to #@[], so won't accept mail from that sender envelope. Or at least it does in 3.12, I don't know if later versions treat it differently. J. -- /------------------------------------\ | minimalist tagline | | http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ | \------------------------------------/
Charles Cazabon wrote: > > You'll have to edit the qmail source to do this. However, you probably > > shouldn't -- double bounces have to have a null envelope sender, so that > > if they are going to bounce, they get thrown away -- if you change it to Jonathan McDowell wrote: > FWIW if you turn on the "sender_verify" option for Exim it thinks it > can't route mail to #@[], so won't accept mail from that sender > envelope. Or at least it does in 3.12, I don't know if later versions > treat it differently. Sendmail has a similar option that creates this problem. Currenty my company's corporate email server (sendmail) won't accept anything with an unrecognized domain name, and thus flushes any bounces it receives from our public email servers (qmail). I know, I know, ditch sendmail and install qmail on the corporate email server. I haven't been able to talk them into letting me do that yet. :) ---Kris Kelley
Stian Brekmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Probably not supposed to talk about these addons here....but anyways: > > I have vpopmail setup on a box now in use. Was wondering if there was some > tips on how to gently switch to vmailmgr. Try asking on the vmailmgr list -- there's several people on that list who have made the switch. You can find a pointer to the list at www.vmailmgr.org. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep in mind you will get a faster response if you return your queries to [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 04:21:15PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 1.can I install ucspi-unix,not install ucspi-tcp? I am not familiar with "ucspi-unix." > 2.After install ucspi-tcp,qmail-1.03+16patches,and daemontools(downloaded from > http://em.cn/~bruceg/qmail+patches), > I telnet mail-abuse.org,it can't through the ninth test way. > what can I do? I tried to telnet into mail-abuse.org and nothing happened. If you are eliciting a test from mail-abuse.org could you be more specific how you are going about testing?
PGP signature
Alex Pennace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 04:21:15PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > 1.can I install ucspi-unix,not install ucspi-tcp? > > I am not familiar with "ucspi-unix." It is an implementation of the ucspi protocol running over Unix domain sockets instead of TCP sockets. It's written by Bruce Guenter; see http://em.ca/~bruceg/ for more. > > 2.After install ucspi-tcp,qmail-1.03+16patches,and daemontools(downloaded > > from http://em.cn/~bruceg/qmail+patches), I telnet mail-abuse.org,it can't > > through the ninth test way. what can I do? To clarify: did you "telnet mail-abuse.org" or "telnet mail-abuse.org 25"? If the former, it has nothing to do with SMTP. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi, We are in the midst of making a decision to choose an mta and I am pretty much convinced on qmail but have read some trash talk that has raised some doubt in my mind. I would really appreciate if someone could give a quick yes/no and how answer to the following issues that have been raised. 1) qmail can't reject mail addressed to a box that doesn't exist? (ie. bounce back to original sender) 2) qmail does not verify domain of envelope sender? (ie. does not do a DNS/reverse lookup) 3) qmail forks off a new qmail-remote process for each recipient of every message...susceptible to easy DoS attack? Much thanks. rich
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We are in the midst of making a decision to choose an mta and I am pretty > much convinced on qmail but have read some trash talk that has raised some > doubt in my mind. I would really appreciate if someone could give a quick > yes/no and how answer to the following issues that have been raised. Sigh -- advocacy. I'll try to be objective. > 1) qmail can't reject mail addressed to a box that doesn't exist? (ie. bounce > back to original sender) qmail will indeed bounce mail if it tries to deliver to a local user and can't find an appropriate delivery instruction (.qmail-specific file, .qmail-default file, .qmail file, etc). What the objectors probably don't like is that qmail doesn't reject it during the RCPT TO phase of the SMTP conversation. This is because the list of valid users is not easily determined, due to the flexibility of .qmail files. > 2) qmail does not verify domain of envelope sender? (ie. does not do a > DNS/reverse lookup) I think there are patches to do this, if you like. I personally don't think it's a good idea, because if your DNS resolver is broken, you can reject legitimate mail. I've received many a bounce complaining my domain didn't exist, when it was a problem in the receiver's DNS resolver. > 3) qmail forks off a new qmail-remote process for each recipient of every > message...susceptible to easy DoS attack? No. concurrencyremote (a qmail control file) specifies a maximum number of qmail-remote processes to have going at a time. It has a sane default value. If you want to raise or lower it, it's very simple to do. Similarly, concurrencylocal specifies the maximum number or qmail-locals to have going. You can specify the maximum number of qmail-smtpds to have going with an appropriate switch to tcpserver. The only 'DoS attack' which qmail facilitates is when you have a lot of messages to deliver to a single remote MTA which is misconfigured. The number of connections which qmail opens to a remote MTA may be large; if the remote system admin has not properly configured their smtpd concurrency, it may overload their system. That's not qmail's fault; it's a sysadmin failure. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 09:17:49AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 1) qmail can't reject mail addressed to a box that doesn't exist? (ie. bounce back >to original sender) Yes it does. > 2) qmail does not verify domain of envelope sender? (ie. does not do a DNS/reverse >lookup) There are patches to do this, but such practices generally cause more problems then they solve. > 3) qmail forks off a new qmail-remote process for each recipient of every >message...susceptible to easy DoS attack? No, concurrencyremote limits the number of qmail-remote processes that run concurrently.
Thanks guys, that's all I wanted! I couldn't find a definitive answer to those questions in the docs that I read. "drum roll please......." <ta-da> qmail it is!! :) speak to you in the future. > >From: Alex Pennace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:52:57 -0500 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: qmail problems? > >On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 09:17:49AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> 1) qmail can't reject mail addressed to a box that doesn't exist? (ie. bounce back >to original sender) > >Yes it does. > >> 2) qmail does not verify domain of envelope sender? (ie. does not do a DNS/reverse >lookup) > >There are patches to do this, but such practices generally cause more >problems then they solve. > >> 3) qmail forks off a new qmail-remote process for each recipient of every >message...susceptible to easy DoS attack? > >No, concurrencyremote limits the number of qmail-remote processes that >run concurrently. > >
"Olivier M." wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 05:01:20PM -0200, Marcio Sa wrote: > > Hello, > > did anyone use a qmail without put users in /etc/passwd or qmail-users , like > > using > > LDAP ? Is it possible ? I want to use qmail without creating users or mboxes > > and > > using LDAP. Its possible with sendmail but i preffer to use qmail. > > There are LDAP extensions made in Switzerland for qmail, have > a look at http://www.nrg4u.com/ > Hello Olivier, i have already installed qmail and LDAP extensions with a lot of success. But , like all in life, one thing doesnt work yet. I created a /var/qmail/bin/create_homedir with r-s,r-s,r-x permissions, owned by root and qmail is trying to create a /home/marcio directory to put Mailbox. The error is obvious: mkdir cannot create directory /home/marcio , permission denied (LDAP error 2.2.2). I don't know how to allow qmail create a diretory. (I tried to put /tmp/marcio im my LDAP homedir and creation is ok, of course). Thanks in advance for another help ;-), Marcio > > Cheers, > Olivier > -- > _________________________________________________________________ > Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland > qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch - http://webmail.omnis.ch
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 02:53:42PM -0200, Marcio Sa wrote: > > There are LDAP extensions made in Switzerland for qmail, have > > a look at http://www.nrg4u.com/ > > > > Hello Olivier, > > i have already installed qmail and LDAP extensions with a lot of success. But , > [...] Sorry, but I have no clue about qmail & ldap (I'm not using it), just know the url :) So please ask on the qmail-ldap mailing list :) Good luck, Olivier -- _________________________________________________________________ Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch - http://webmail.omnis.ch
We have an own list for qmail-ldap, use it. Am Donnerstag, 14. Dezember 2000 17:53 schrieb Marcio Sa: > i have already installed qmail and LDAP extensions with a lot of success. > But , like all in life, > one thing doesnt work yet. I created a /var/qmail/bin/create_homedir with > r-s,r-s,r-x permissions, > owned by root and qmail is trying to create a /home/marcio directory to put > Mailbox. The error is obvious: > > mkdir cannot create directory /home/marcio , permission denied (LDAP error > 2.2.2). > > I don't know how to allow qmail create a diretory. (I tried to put > /tmp/marcio im my LDAP homedir > and creation is ok, of course). homediremaker (or whatever you called it) runs under the uid/gid of the to-be-created-user, so he must have write permissions to /home. > Thanks in advance for another help ;-), > Marcio > > > Cheers, > > Olivier > > -- > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland > > qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch - http://webmail.omnis.ch -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de | Germany
> Hi I just want to know if there is a solution for Smtp AUTH. I > tried qmail-smtpd-auth-0.26.tar.gz but it doesn't work :-( ....... The only other option is qmail-smtpd-auth's immediate predecessor, a patch written by "Mrs. Brisby". If you can't get qmail-smtpd-auth to work, odds are you won't get this patch to work either. What exactly is happening? Give us an idea of how you applied the patch, how you tested it, how you've determined it's not working, what any relevant log files say, and so forth. I use qmail-smtpd-auth without any trouble, and the author of that patch also subscribes to this list (or did, at least), so I'm sure you can get help here. ---Kris Kelley
Hi,I am facing a huge problem for ipchains with my pop server using vmailmgr+qmail. My server is not able to receive any emails once the firewall (ipchains) is executed.
my pop server startup script is as follow:
exec /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -H -c200 202.35.12.1 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup dns1.3dsources.com /usr/bin/checkvpw /usr/sbin/relay-ctrl-allow /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
my ipchains script is as follow:
ipchains -A input -i eth0 -p tcp \
-s any/0 1024:65535 \
-d 202.35.12.1 110 -j ACCEPTipchains -A input -i eth0 -p tcp \
-s any/0 0:1024 \
-d 202.35.12.1 110 -j ACCEPTipchains -A output -i eth0 -p tcp ! -y\
-s 202.35.12.1 110 \
-d any/0 1024:65535 -j ACCEPTipchains -A output -i eth0 -p tcp ! -y\
-s 202.35.12.1 110 \
-d any/0 0:1023 -j ACCEPTI am using Redhat Linux 6.2 + qmail + tcpserver + vmailmgr. I am using outexpress to pop into my server. But I got the following error messages stating that "Failed to connect to server"
Please help me out.
Re: I haven't tried to send any messages out yet !
Thank you so much
Mark Lo
What kind of loop protection does qmail have? By that, I mean, if I have a user that forwards his email to another account on another system, which forwards back to his original mailbox, how does qmail handle this case? Thanks, Laurence -- Laurence Brockman Unix Administrator Videon Cablesystems Alberta Inc 10450-178 St. Edmonton, AB T5S 1S2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (780) 486-6527
> What kind of loop protection does qmail have? By that, I > mean, if I have a user that forwards his email to another > account on another system, which forwards back to his > original mailbox, how does qmail handle this case? qmail inserts a "Delivered-To: " line into the header on each delivery, and will notice any loop that way, even if the loop is between multiple hosts. This is mentioned in BLURB3 in the distribution and in the 'qmail-local' man page. -- gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
We're getting junk mail for a particular, non-existent mailbox. To add insult to injury, the sender of the spam, no surprise, isn't legitimate - so automated messages to them telling them of the non-existent account, themselves, bounce. What's the best way to simply have *all* mail for a particular mailbox go to /dev/null? I created a .qmail-{mailbox} file and simply left it blank - hoping that would do it. Is that an appropriate, effective measure? Thanks in advance. -David
> What's the best way to simply have *all* mail for a > particular mailbox go to /dev/null? I created a > .qmail-{mailbox} file and simply left it blank - > hoping that would do it. Is that an appropriate, > effective measure? No; in the case of a zero-sized .qmail file, the "defaultdelivery" instructions will be followed (see 'man dot-qmail'). What you want is a .qmail file containing a single line with a comment in it, so that the file is non-empty but contains no delivery instructions. All mail to that user will be silently discarded. -- gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 09:57:34AM -0800, David Geller wrote: > We're getting junk mail for a particular, non-existent mailbox. To add > insult to injury, the sender of the spam, no surprise, isn't legitimate - so > automated messages to them telling them of the non-existent account, > themselves, bounce. > > What's the best way to simply have *all* mail for a particular mailbox go to > /dev/null? I created a .qmail-{mailbox} file and simply left it blank - > hoping that would do it. Is that an appropriate, effective measure? Nope, blank means default delivery. Put a single # (hash) into that .qmail-mailbox file. RC -- +------------------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede T�cnica | P�. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7� E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 0000 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459
I need to relay people who connect with dynamic IPs, Is the any way of relaying them? Thanks in advance Excuse my poor english ______________________________________________________________________________ Consigue tu cuenta de correo universal y gratuita en http://webmail.wanadoo.es
> I need to relay people who connect with dynamic IPs, Is the any way of relaying > them? There are two popular methods: SMTP-after-POP (or SMTP-after-IMAP) requires a user to log into the POP (or IMAP) server and check his/her email. Afterwards, that user will be allowed to relay from that particular IP address for a certain amount of time. ESMTP AUTH is an additional SMTP command that enables email servers to require authentication before a user is allowed to relay. There are qmail patches for both methods. Look around for them at www.qmail.com. ---Kris Kelley
rmarcos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I need to relay people who connect with dynamic IPs, Is the any way of > relaying them? This is a qmail FAQ. I recommend you use Bruce Guenter's relay-ctrl package, which implements an SMTP-after-POP scheme without requiring any patches to qmail. See http://em.ca/~bruceg/ for more info. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can i configure qmail to allow a users to send emails only to the localhost.. and to can not send emails romote (to another host) Thankyou Seby...
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:17:40 +0200, Seby wrote: > How can i configure qmail to allow a users to send emails only to > the localhost.. and to can not send emails romote (to another host) echo 0 > /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote Might do the trick---but I believe that would just hold the mail in the queue until it timed out. That may not be exactly what you're looking for. Andy
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 08:17:40PM +0200, Seby wrote: > How can i configure qmail to allow a users to send emails only to > the localhost.. and to can not send emails romote (to another host) You don't say whether that user is a logged in Unix user or one using an remote MUA such as Eudora or Exchange etc. You also don't say whether it is all users or just a couple of users. In either event the mechanism is essentially the same. You need to create a separate instance of qmail which has concurrencyremote set to zero. You then need to ensure that those users can only access that instance of qmail, eg, via IP rules in tcpserver or via Unix permissions for logged in users. If the restriction applies to all users, then you don't need a separate instance. How to set up separate instance has been discussed before and the details can be found in the archives via www.qmail.org Regards.
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Andy Bradford wrote: > On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:17:40 +0200, Seby wrote: > > > How can i configure qmail to allow a users to send emails only to > > the localhost.. and to can not send emails romote (to another host) > > echo 0 > /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote > Might do the trick---but I believe that would just hold the mail in the > queue until it timed out. That may not be exactly what you're looking > for. sorry... but a meant to say a specific user not all users..... > > Andy > --------------- -=Ionita Sebastian=- http://lapd.cj.edu.ro/~seby E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------- "If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he next comes to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." -- Thomas De Quincey (1785 - 1859)
I need to know how exactly ezmlm works with database support because Im implementing a web mailing system here.... Let me explain better how it works.We have a customer database here in a MS SQL server, and frequently someone has to send emails to all of them, or to specific ones. In another machine we have FreeBSD 4.0, ezmlm and qmail. So I made a web interface that allows the user to put the message of the email, subject, from, etc. and a lot of options that selects the right customers of the database. The cgi process the options, makes a dinamic query to MS SQL, import the users and insert them into the mysql local database of ezmlm, in a list called generic. After this proccessing, I send the contents of the email to this list and finished...
But what happens if another user uses the system while the first is still being sending? Ezmlm makes a unique select to mysql, so changes in the table after the sending process begins take no effect? Or I have to wait until the first process finishes to start the second?
Hope my question is clear, and sorry about my English... :-(
Thanks!!!-- It's not a bug, it's tradition!
Am Donnerstag, 14. Dezember 2000 19:59 schrieb Fernando Costa de Almeida:> > I need to know how exactly ezmlm works with database support So the ezmlm mailing list would be the right place to ask. > because > Im implementing a web mailing system here.... Let me explain better how > it works. > We have a customer database here in a MS SQL server, and frequently > someone has to send emails to all of them, or to specific ones. In > another machine we have FreeBSD 4.0, ezmlm and qmail. So I made a web > interface that allows the user to put the message of the email, subject, > from, etc. and a lot of options that selects the right customers of the > database. The cgi process the options, makes a dinamic query to MS SQL, > import the users and insert them into the mysql local database of ezmlm, > in a list called generic. After this proccessing, I send the contents of > the email to this list and finished... Can't see the need for ezmlm here. Just call qmail-inject for every recipient. man qmail-inject is your friend. > But what happens if another user uses the system while the first is > still being sending? Ezmlm makes a unique select to mysql, so changes in > the table after the sending process begins take no effect? Or I have to > wait until the first process finishes to start the second? > > Hope my question is clear, and sorry about my English... :-( > > Thanks!!! > > -- > It's not a bug, it's tradition! ---------------------------------------- Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"; name="Anhang: 1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: ---------------------------------------- -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de | Germany
Hi , thank you for you prompt answer to my message. Excuse my lack of experience but it isn't clear to me the way the message copy works, my doubts are as follows: 1. Where are these messages stored? 2. Can you give me an approximate idea of how the filter you suggest works. Would it be with a script? Thanks once again and best regards. Regards, Andr�s Segovia
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Charrua wrote: > Hi , thank you for you prompt answer to my message. > > Excuse my lack of experience but it isn't clear to me the way the message > copy works, my doubts are as follows: Go back and read the man pages, examine http://www.qmail.org and http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html. There is a wealth of information there just waiting for you to read it. > > 1. Where are these messages stored? > 2. Can you give me an approximate idea of how the filter you suggest works. > Would it be with a script? By making the appropriate patch (as outlined in the FAQ), every message is ALSO delivered to a local user called log. On the assumption that you don't have a local user called log, the message will be controlled by the contents of ~alias/.qmail-log (Just like it says in the FAQ). So, in ~alias/.qmail-log you would put: | myfilter ./trapped And myfilter would examine the message and determine if it was from, or for the user in question and then exit 0. Then the message would be saved in the file ~alias/trapped for you to examine at your leisure. If the message wasn't from or for the user it would exit 99 and the message would not be saved anywhere. It's up to you to write myfilter, Have a look at the dot-qmail and qmail-command man pages. -- Regards Peter ---------- Peter Samuel [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-smith.org (development) http://www.e-smith.com (corporate) Phone: +1 613 368 4398 Fax: +1 613 564 7739 e-smith, inc. 1500-150 Metcalfe St, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P1 Canada "If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Well i started the smtpd server with this command "tcpserver -c20 -x /var/qmail/control/smtp.cdb -g18 -u81 -R -v 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd /bin/checkpasswd /bin/true /bin/cmd5checkpw /bin/true". the server started and accepted connection via telnet. But at the moment a windows-user tried with outlook to login on the smtpd-server the server says "bad password or username". I looked at the messagelog and find " checkpasswd : domain.de:ipnumber:port user "" no $HOME, access denied". But on my first configuration (smtp after pop) all was ok. The user had first to login with pop3 and after that he can send emails. P.s. with telnet i got a connection and auth works. Thx for helping Charles > -----Original Message----- > From: Kris Kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Donnerstag, 14. Dezember 2000 18:14 > To: QMail Mailing List > Subject: Re: Smtp AUTH > > > > Hi I just want to know if there is a solution for Smtp AUTH. I > > tried qmail-smtpd-auth-0.26.tar.gz but it doesn't work :-( ....... > > The only other option is qmail-smtpd-auth's immediate predecessor, a patch > written by "Mrs. Brisby". If you can't get qmail-smtpd-auth to work, odds > are you won't get this patch to work either. > > What exactly is happening? Give us an idea of how you applied the patch, > how you tested it, how you've determined it's not working, what > any relevant > log files say, and so forth. I use qmail-smtpd-auth without any trouble, > and the author of that patch also subscribes to this list (or did, at > least), so I'm sure you can get help here. > > ---Kris Kelley > >
hi All, i'm still having trouble with a delay in completing transactions from clients regardless of what we use, pegasus, outlook. i have changed run in /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd and added -H -R -l and removed -x -p. but still to no avail. i am told this is a tcpserver problem? thanks, richard morris
Hoi folx, I am currently setting up a new mailserver and do the switch from a heavily patched 1.01 to 1.03. With the 1.01 I used Russ Nelson's modification to ucspi-tcp and qmail-smtpd to do the dns queries for RBLs and block emails. In the process of migrating I'd like to provide more "service" to our customers. Thus I don't want to block RBL listed hosts but accept and "tag" the emails. What I am looking for is a program that I can plug between tcpserver and qmail-smtpd which basically does the DNS lookups, does not talk SMTP but just set e.g. BOUNCEMAIL RBLID environment variables and hand the complete SMTP conversation on to qmail-smtpd. In qmail-smtpd I may then decide whether to reject or accept and qmail-queue could insert either X-RBL-Check: RBLID or foreach token in $RBLID X-RBL-Check: token where tokens would be e.g. ORBS, MAPS-RBL, MAPS-RSS, MAPS-DUL, ... so that the user may sort/decide based on those Headers how to handle the message. (We have users that want it blocked and users that simply want the info, so I would set up two different smtpds to the same queue behaving differently and configure the MX of the domains as the customer would like to have it). Before I start to write that myself, has anybody done something like that already? If I have to write it, any wishes/suggestions? ;-) \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
> In the process of migrating I'd like to provide more "service" to our > customers. Thus I don't want to block RBL listed hosts but accept and "tag" > the emails. <snip> > qmail-queue could insert either > X-RBL-Check: RBLID > or foreach token in $RBLID > X-RBL-Check: token > where tokens would be e.g. ORBS, MAPS-RBL, MAPS-RSS, MAPS-DUL, ... <snip> > Before I start to write that myself, has anybody done something like > that already? The "Spamcontrol" patch has marked similarities to what you propose - worth taking a look at to see if it covers most of what you want... see under, http://www.fehcom.de/qmail/qmail_en.html cheers, Andrew.
Is it possible for more than one client to access the same mailbox via IMAP? If so, are there any risks involved? Would there be a higher chance of corruption if, say, user #1 moved a message to another folder while user #2 tried to access the same message at roughly the same time? And finally, if there were risks involved, is there any way to limit access so that only one person could access a mailbox at any point in time? [We have accounts such as 'support' in which multiple personel access. I am planning to replace the WorldMail server with qmail.] ../mk
* Marc Knoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001214 14:25]: > [We have accounts such as 'support' in which multiple personel access. I > am planning to replace the WorldMail server with qmail.] Why not avoid the whole mess of many users in one mailbox and set up a list of forwarding addresses for the ``support'' e-mail address? We do this and it works just fine... /pg -- Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- > I don't have time right now, or I'd offer to write it. Is this the official Debian slogan?? (Seen in some news exchange, contributed by Mike Coleman)
Marc Knoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is it possible for more than one client to access the same mailbox via > IMAP? If so, are there any risks involved? > > Would there be a higher chance of corruption if, say, user #1 moved a > message to another folder while user #2 tried to access the same message at > roughly the same time? This would be entirely dependent on the IMAP server software involved. A design using Maildirs would almost certainly not result in corruption, although you could still have problems with race conditions: -user one retrieves a list of messages in one folder -user two retrieves same list -user one moves message "Foo" to another folder -user two attempts to retrive message "Foo" from the folder > And finally, if there were risks involved, is there any way to limit access > so that only one person could access a mailbox at any point in time? The IMAP server could lock the mailbox when a person logs in, as many POP3 servers do. I'm not sure if the common IMAP servers do this. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Peter, Greg and Charles! I will implement qmail using the maildir format. I am using courier-imap on another qmail server, and it seems to run quite well. Here are a few snippets from their web site: * "Multiple applications can access the same Maildir simultaneously without requiring any kind of locking whatsoever. " * "It works particularly well over NFS" * "Ability to restrict the maximum number of IMAP logins, and the maximum number of logins from the same IP address." * "Shared folders. With additional server-side setup, folders can be shared between groups of accounts." I have thought about a mailing list, but it becomes tricky determining who has handled a ticket/email without generating more mail. That call center solution is also interesting, but may be overkill for our needs. All this IMAP talk raises another question I have - which do most of you use? [An open ended question that could generate a flurry of responses! ;] [Actually, a 'poll' page would be a neat idea so that people could get a good idea of how others are using/setting up qmail.] ../mk
> All this IMAP talk raises another question I have - which do > most of you use? [An open ended question that could generate > a flurry of responses! ;] I don't now, but when I used IMAP, I preferred Cyrus IMAP. It has a reasonably clean design that throws away /bin/mail compatibility to concentrate on handling IMAP optimally. -- gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
I think this is interesting for this list: http://slashdot.org/yro/00/12/13/1853237.shtml Armando
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, asantos wrote: > I think this is interesting for this list: > > http://slashdot.org/yro/00/12/13/1853237.shtml That's a mail policy issue, not a mail server issue. Consider taking RBL-related issues to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's certainly on-topic for that list. It'll certainly do nothing but worsen the signal-to-noise ratio here. -- Edward S. Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.nyx.net/~emarshal/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [ Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. ]
Hello, i've 2 qmail-server, one intern (LAN) and one extern (DMZ), so how can i configure, that the intern qmail server send email only to the extern qmail server (DMZ)? The extern qmail server should only communicate with the world. I use for each users unix accounts, intern and the extern. Have you any idee? Thank for the help. best regards Gustav qmail-intern<-->|Firewall|<--extern-qmail-->|Router|<-->Internet -- Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i've 2 qmail-server, one intern (LAN) and one extern (DMZ), so how can i > configure, that the intern qmail server send email only to the extern > qmail server (DMZ)? The extern qmail server should only communicate with the > world. I use for each users unix accounts, intern and the extern. This is a FAQ. Read `man qmail-remote` or the FAQ for the answer. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't get a response to this the first time around, so here it is again. Is the /var/qmail/users/assign file the only file that needs to be changed to specify a new location for mail per virtual domain? Peter Brezny SysAdmin Services Inc.
Peter Brezny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is the /var/qmail/users/assign file the only file that needs to be changed > to specify a new location for mail per virtual domain? Virtual users or domains are assigned to local users or aliases with /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains . /var/qmail/users/assign only affects virtual domains indirectly -- qmail will consult assign to find out how to handle mail for the user specified in virtualdomains. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Help, I've been mail flooded to invalid users. My apologies for the length of this, but I'm trying to be complete. The background is as follows. My qmail server is the secondary MX for domain tri.net. mx1.tri.net got flooded with about 28,000 invalid user emails, which overflowed onto my qmail secondary server, mx2.tri.net. As qmail.remote is sending them from mx2.tri.net to mx1.tri.net, one of two things is happening: 1. Fails because of unavailable socket on mx1.tri.net. 2. Log entry as follows- Dec 14 16:43:14 radius qmail: 976812194.440027 delivery 5510: failure: 205.153.244.6_does_not_like_recipient./Remote_host_said:_550_<bail [EMAIL PROTECTED]>..._User_unknown/Giving_up_on_205.153.244.6./ My qstat does not seem to be getting smaller. My qread looks as follows. ----clip ---- 12 Dec 2000 21:58:59 GMT #53728 15374 <> remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12 Dec 2000 22:24:01 GMT #53751 15462 <> remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12 Dec 2000 12:53:05 GMT #53774 1146 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> bouncing remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] 13 Dec 2000 00:18:33 GMT #54073 33878 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----clip ---- My questions are as follows. Because of the 'giving_up' message, is it still retrying the same bad address again? Is there a 'filter' I can install to prevent qmail-remote from sending the emails from '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on to mx1.tri.net? What does the 'done' mean on some of the messages in the qread dump? And will they clean out automagicly? Any help will be appreciated. Some 'good' email has been trapped in the queue, such as the last entry in the qread dump. But if I have to, I could completely dump the queue as a last resort. Thanks in advance. Sam
Sam Laffere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > mx1.tri.net got flooded with about 28,000 invalid user emails, which > overflowed onto my qmail secondary server, mx2.tri.net. > As qmail.remote is sending them from mx2.tri.net to mx1.tri.net, one of two > things is happening: > 1. Fails because of unavailable socket on mx1.tri.net. > > 2. Log entry as follows- > Dec 14 16:43:14 radius qmail: 976812194.440027 delivery 5510: > failure: > > 205.153.244.6_does_not_like_recipient./Remote_host_said:_550_<bail > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>..._User_unknown/Giving_up_on_205.153.244.6./ > > > My qstat does not seem to be getting smaller. My qread looks as follows. [...] > Because of the 'giving_up' message, is it still retrying the same bad > address again? No. However, qmail will then inject a bounce message, so the size of the queue will not get smaller instantly. If the message was spam, qmail may not be able to deliver the bounce immediately either, and it may take a while to clear out of the queue. > Is there a 'filter' I can install to prevent qmail-remote from sending the > emails from '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on to mx1.tri.net? See qmHandle (IIRC) on www.qmail.org for removing things from the queue by hand. > What does the 'done' mean on some of the messages in the qread dump? And > will they clean out automagicly? Yes, qmail-clean will remove them from the queue automatically. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:52:04PM -0600, Sam Laffere wrote: > Because of the 'giving_up' message, is it still retrying the same bad > address again? Yes. > What does the 'done' mean on some of the messages in the qread dump? And > will they clean out automagicly? Yes, that was a message with multi recipients and some of the addresses (the "done" ones) have been delivered. Others have not so the email ist still sitting in your queue. > Is there a 'filter' I can install to prevent qmail-remote from sending the > emails from '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on to mx1.tri.net? - add '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' to control/badmailfrom - get qmhandle from http://www.io.com/~mick/soft/qmhandle.html - stop qmail-send and qmail-smtpd - remove the messages that are from/to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' from the queue. - restart qmail-send and qmail-smtpd "dictionary spams" are evil. If you can't stop it just at the beginning when they come in, cleanup is much work to do. last we had something which is IMHO even more evil, a "dictionary sender spam" where the spammer abused a domain of a customer of ours and injected bulks of about 100-500 messages each with a different sender within the abused domain via relay open mailservers. results in ten thousands of bounces from mailservers all over the world to some hundered different addresses :(( All you can do is watch them coming, check for new addresses and add them to the badrcptto file (if you have the patch installed and I would urge everyone to do so). \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:52:04PM -0600, Sam Laffere wrote: > Help, I've been mail flooded to invalid users. My apologies for the length > of this, but I'm trying to be complete. The background is as follows. > > My qmail server is the secondary MX for domain tri.net. > mx1.tri.net got flooded with about 28,000 invalid user emails, which > overflowed onto my qmail secondary server, mx2.tri.net. (As an aside. This re-raises the question of whether it is good practise to be a secondary MX for another site. I generally think it's a bad idea...) > My qstat does not seem to be getting smaller. My qread looks as follows. It is actually. The number of "done" entries are increasing. > > ----clip ---- > 12 Dec 2000 21:58:59 GMT #53728 15374 <> > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 12 Dec 2000 22:24:01 GMT #53751 15462 <> > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 12 Dec 2000 12:53:05 GMT #53774 1146 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> bouncing > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > done remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 13 Dec 2000 00:18:33 GMT #54073 33878 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----clip ---- > > > My questions are as follows. > > Because of the 'giving_up' message, is it still retrying the same bad > address again? No. What's happened is that each email has many recipients so it's going thru each recipient trying to delivery it. Ultimately your system will try and send bounces back to the (probably forged) sender. You are best to remove them if you can. > Is there a 'filter' I can install to prevent qmail-remote from sending the > emails from '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on to mx1.tri.net? Not a filter. But you can remove the queue entries with rm - and there are tools on www.qmail.org that do that I believe. > What does the 'done' mean on some of the messages in the qread dump? And "done" means precisely what you'd expect. Delivery of that mail to that recipient is complete (either success or permanent failure). But in your case there are other recipients in the mail so it stays in the queue. > will they clean out automagicly? Yes. Ultimately as bounces. > Any help will be appreciated. Some 'good' email has been trapped in the > queue, such as the last entry in the qread dump. But if I have to, I could > completely dump the queue as a last resort. Depending on how bad your queue is, it might be easier to trash it and rebuild it with a make setup. Regards.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Trtanj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 1:04 PM Subject: RE : RE : Smtp AUTH > Well i started the smtpd server with this command "tcpserver -c20 -x > /var/qmail/control/smtp.cdb -g18 -u81 -R -v 0 smtp > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd /bin/checkpasswd /bin/true /bin/cmd5checkpw > /bin/true". Virtually the same as mine, with one major exception. The latest version of cmd5checkpw handles both clear-text passwords and the CRAM-MD5 scheme, so I'm not using checkpasswd at all. While that's something to check, I doubt it's the cause of the problem you are having. > the server started and accepted connection via telnet. But at > the moment a windows-user tried with outlook to login on the smtpd-server > the server says "bad password or username". I looked at the messagelog and > find " checkpasswd : domain.de:ipnumber:port user "" no $HOME, access > denied". But on my first configuration (smtp after pop) all was ok. The user > had first to login with pop3 and after that he can send emails. Yes, SMTP-after-POP schemes do not require the client to have any special knowledge about what's going on. ESMTP AUTH of course requires the client send the proper authentication information. I just sent a message through my AUTH-enabled server using Outlook, and it went without a hitch. Same with Outlook Express, which I use daily. Since the error message mentioned something about no $HOME, you may want to look at whatever checkpasswd is using to look up user information (/etc/passwd, presumably) and make sure this person actually has a home directory set. Then, if checkpasswd is as paranoid as qmail, make sure that the person actually owns his home directory, and that the directory is not world-writable. If none of this fixes the problem, you might want to post a question to the password mailing list. See http://cr.yp.to/lists.html#password for details. Good luck! ---Kris Kelley
Thx for answer. Ermmm iam not using /etc/passwd for my users...i use /etc/pop3pw The file look like [name]:[password]:[NULL]:[Homedir]: for example charles:secret:0:/home/pop3/charles: . Charles > -----Original Message----- > From: Kris Kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Donnerstag, 14. Dezember 2000 21:08 > To: QMail Mailing List > Subject: Re: RE : Smtp AUTH > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charles Trtanj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 1:04 PM > Subject: RE : RE : Smtp AUTH > > > > Well i started the smtpd server with this command "tcpserver -c20 -x > > /var/qmail/control/smtp.cdb -g18 -u81 -R -v 0 smtp > > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd /bin/checkpasswd /bin/true /bin/cmd5checkpw > > /bin/true". > > Virtually the same as mine, with one major exception. The latest > version of > cmd5checkpw handles both clear-text passwords and the CRAM-MD5 scheme, so > I'm not using checkpasswd at all. While that's something to > check, I doubt > it's the cause of the problem you are having. > > > the server started and accepted connection via telnet. But at > > the moment a windows-user tried with outlook to login on the > smtpd-server > > the server says "bad password or username". I looked at the > messagelog and > > find " checkpasswd : domain.de:ipnumber:port user "" no $HOME, access > > denied". But on my first configuration (smtp after pop) all was ok. The > user > > had first to login with pop3 and after that he can send emails. > > Yes, SMTP-after-POP schemes do not require the client to have any special > knowledge about what's going on. ESMTP AUTH of course requires the client > send the proper authentication information. I just sent a message through > my AUTH-enabled server using Outlook, and it went without a hitch. Same > with Outlook Express, which I use daily. > > Since the error message mentioned something about no $HOME, you > may want to > look at whatever checkpasswd is using to look up user information > (/etc/passwd, presumably) and make sure this person actually has a home > directory set. Then, if checkpasswd is as paranoid as qmail, > make sure that > the person actually owns his home directory, and that the directory is not > world-writable. > > If none of this fixes the problem, you might want to post a > question to the > password mailing list. See http://cr.yp.to/lists.html#password > for details. > > Good luck! > > ---Kris Kelley > >
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 01:52:14PM -0500, Tim Hunter wrote: > First Excuse my Outlook 2000, corp standard. > The only files you need to be concerned with for virtual hosts using > vpopmail: > /var/qmail/control/rcthosts > metta.lk > /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains > metta.lk:metta.lk > /var/qmail/users/assign > +metta.lk-:metta.lk:512:5002:/home/vpopmail/domains/metta.lk:-:: > /home/vpopmail/domains/metta.lk/vpasswd > relevant password entries > All of these changes would have been made if you added the domain with > ~vpopmail/bin/vadddomain metta.lk > I would suggest deleting the domain ~vpopmail/bin/vdeldomain metta.lk > and readding it, something is severely screwed up. Thanks for the replies. You are quite right. I re-installed from the OS onwards and it works now. Thanks for the clear notes from everyone. Mettavihari Sri Lanka.
We have experienced very bad email floods from the Bare CRLF code in Qmail, where another site that didn't understand the error and will keep sending the same message forever. It seems to be automated email programs and Microsoft SMTP servers, they will just try the same message until they are put in the badmailfrom file. I am not sure why this is not a subject that has come up more, I would think others would have had this problem. From what I can tell Qmail would be better if it could somehow prevent a server from doing this, the foreign hosts tend to not listen to the way it currently complains to them. We finally just commented out the Bare CRLF clauses and we no longer have these floods occur. I am wondering how many others have come accross this problem and if this was how they dealt with it or some other way? One example of a site that did this was 'makeoverstudios.com' which I am not sure if they still have that problem, but it was thier automated email responder. We noticed this after getting very large servers, and don't know if that really made it show up or what? Thanks, Chris k Chris Kennedy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 18:33:08 -0600 (CST) From: CK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> We have experienced very bad email floods from the Bare CRLF code in Qmail, where another site that didn't understand the error and will keep sending the same message forever. It seems to be automated email programs and Microsoft SMTP servers, they will just try the same message until they are put in the badmailfrom file. I am not sure why this is not a subject that has come up more, I would think others would have had this problem. From what I can tell Qmail would be better if it could somehow prevent a server from doing this, the foreign hosts tend to not listen to the way it currently complains to them. We finally just commented out the Bare CRLF clauses and we no longer have these floods occur. I am wondering how many others have come accross this problem and if this was how they dealt with it or some other way? One example of a site that did this was 'makeoverstudios.com' which I am not sure if they still have that problem, but it was thier automated email responder. We noticed this after getting very large servers, and don't know if that really made it show up or what? I've seen this too, in my case from sites in China. One easy fix is to change 451 to 554 in the string in straynewline in qmail-smtpd.c. This changes a temporary error condition to a permanent one, and normally causes the errant e-mail server to give up immediately. Ian
> We have experienced very bad email floods from the > Bare CRLF code in Qmail, where another site that > didn't understand the error and will keep sending > the same message forever. It seems to be automated > email programs and Microsoft SMTP servers, they will > just try the same message until they are put in the > badmailfrom file. I am not sure why this is not a > subject that has come up more, I would think others Actually this subject appears pretty frequently on this list. > One easy fix is to change 451 to 554 in the string in straynewline in > qmail-smtpd.c. This changes a temporary error condition to a > permanent one, and normally causes the errant e-mail server to give up > immediately. And that's one of the two solutions. The other is to use the fixcrio utility. Search in the archive on "fixcrio". cheers, Andrew.
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 01:03:35AM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > And that's one of the two solutions. The other is to use the fixcrio utility. Search >in > the archive on "fixcrio". And the third is to block those sites completely and tell their sysadmin about http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q224/9/83.ASP as those mailserver choke on every 4xx code. \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
hi all, this [EMAIL PROTECTED] email thats going around sends [EMAIL PROTECTED] as an in-line "From:" header not "MAIL FROM" out-of-band info. does anyone know how to block based on the header not the "MAIL FROM"? Regards, Marc-Adrian Napoli Network Admin Connect Infobahn Australia +61 2 9212 0387
if u are using vpopmail and sqwebmail do like this so you wont see from address from sqwebmail touch /usr/local/share/sqwebmail/nochangingfrom ----- Original Message ----- From: Marc-Adrian Napoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 6:49 AM Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > hi all, > > this [EMAIL PROTECTED] email thats going around sends [EMAIL PROTECTED] as > an in-line "From:" header not "MAIL FROM" out-of-band info. > > does anyone know how to block based on the header not the "MAIL FROM"? > > Regards, > > Marc-Adrian Napoli > Network Admin > Connect Infobahn Australia > +61 2 9212 0387 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
re: qmail not notifying you of temporary failures. the default time to sit in the queue is 1 week. you can run a script from cron to examine the queue at regular intervals and send email to those concerned if email hasn't been delivered. search www.qmail.org for Matt Ranney or Brian Wightman. Both have written perl scripts to do this. I know of a 3rd script which was posted to this mailing list, but i don't see it mentioned on qmail.org. it was something like "qmail-deferred-notifier". ---Matt
with sendmail, if an entry like this: joe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] is in /etc/aliases then any message sent to joe will be bounced back with a helpful note about joe's new email address. this way you don't have to forward email to joe's new address for years after they leave. eventually joe's correspondents learn to use joe's new address. if i only forwarded joe's email, his correspondents would have no incentive to use his new address and i hate seeing mail to joe in the queue years after his departure. before i work on a script to do this with qmail i thought i'd ask if anyone has done this before. i'd rather not re-invent the wheel. ---Matt
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 10:32:35PM -0800, Matt Harrington wrote: > > with sendmail, if an entry like this: > > joe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > is in /etc/aliases then any message sent to joe will be bounced back with > a helpful note about joe's new email address. this way you don't have to > forward email to joe's new address for years after they leave. eventually > joe's correspondents learn to use joe's new address. if i only forwarded > joe's email, his correspondents would have no incentive to use his new > address and i hate seeing mail to joe in the queue years after his > departure. > > before i work on a script to do this with qmail i thought i'd ask if > anyone has done this before. i'd rather not re-invent the wheel. Use bouncesaying. bouncesaying in a .qmail file causes a QSBMF-style bounce to be sent with the supplied string used as the failure indication for that recipient.
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 10:32:57PM -0800, Matt Harrington wrote: > > with sendmail, if an entry like this: > > joe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > is in /etc/aliases then any message sent to joe will be bounced back with > a helpful note about joe's new email address. this way you don't have to > forward email to joe's new address for years after they leave. eventually > joe's correspondents learn to use joe's new address. if i only forwarded > joe's email, his correspondents would have no incentive to use his new > address and i hate seeing mail to joe in the queue years after his > departure. > > before i work on a script to do this with qmail i thought i'd ask if > anyone has done this before. i'd rather not re-invent the wheel. In Joe's .qmail go: | bouncesaying "Joe has gone. Try contacting him at [EMAIL PROTECTED]" Obviously if you remove joe's home, then it'll be ~alias/.qmail-joe that you place the bouncesaying in. There's a manpage on that command. Regards.
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 01:42:26AM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote: > Use bouncesaying. bouncesaying in a .qmail file causes a QSBMF-style > bounce to be sent with the supplied string used as the failure > indication for that recipient. Great! that does it. Any idea how to include a newline in the error though? along the lines of... | bouncesaying '\nMy new address is:\n\[EMAIL PROTECTED]' ---Matt
Dear qmail-ers, I got something to ask : how to add advertisement banner or image at every message that runs through qmail ? I already know how to add text/plain footer or header but I still face problem with image or html type ...... Thanks in advance. Best Regards, Paulus Hendarwan Qmail Administrator
This list may be the ultimate trap. I've tried so many different things, followed so many advices... but still around in utter frustration! Here follows header lines from the msgs I receive from the qmail mailing list: ... >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 01 08:51:41 2000 Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... I've sent coutless msgs to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... qmail-carotte qmail-navet qmail-pamplemousse qmail-pissenlit qmail-sesame "en vain" never received any thing back from those automated addresses. Could someone definitely help with this matter ? And anyone who would suggest that I'm no subscriber, or that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not registered, or that I registered with another address, or God knows what, should ask how in the world do I receive qmail stuff at this address with a well formed qmail return address precisely based on mine. MILLIONS OF THANKS Franck
