Re: PostFix as a "/dev/null" MTA?

2016-10-12 Thread lists
On the surface, SA hitting multiple RBLs sounds inefficient. However does each 
hit add to the SA rating? If so, that sounds like a plan. That is if a message 
is rejected by N RBLs, it is more significant than just one RBL.

  Original Message  
From: Bill Cole
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 9:11 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Reply To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: PostFix as a "/dev/null" MTA?

On 12 Oct 2016, at 18:59, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:

> You really can't rate RBLs in a normal setup since if one rejects the 
> email, the others don't get a try.

That's not the case if you use DNSBLs in postscreen or SpamAssassin. In 
those cases the lookups get done asynchronously and all the answers are 
(or at least can be) logged. e.g:

Oct 11 18:45:14 bigsky postfix/dnsblog[94896]: addr 41.138.199.26 listed 
by domain blackholes.scconsult.com as 127.0.0.2
Oct 11 18:45:14 bigsky postfix/dnsblog[94893]: addr 41.138.199.26 listed 
by domain zen.spamhaus.org as 127.0.0.4
Oct 11 18:45:14 bigsky postfix/dnsblog[94889]: addr 41.138.199.26 listed 
by domain ix.dnsbl.manitu.net as 127.0.0.2

Either one of the last 2 on their own would be adequate for postscreen 
to reject the connection. You will note that the PIDs are in reverse 
order, indicating that the last dnsblog process spawned was the first to 
complete. This makes sense, as that DNS lookup never left the system's 
motherboard, while the others had to cross a WAN link and multiple 
routers.

My recent logs have no examples of multi-DNSBL messages making it to SA, 
because my config is designed to avoid the need to have SA look at mail, 
but when it does get a message that hits multiple DNSBLs, I see them all 
in the log of rule hits for ones that get rejected an also a header for 
the very rare case of them getting through (which is effectively 
impossible unless they are targeting postmaster@ or abuse@).


Re: PostFix as a "/dev/null" MTA?

2016-10-12 Thread Bill Cole

On 12 Oct 2016, at 18:59, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:

You really can't rate RBLs in a normal setup since if one rejects the 
email, the others don't get a try.


That's not the case if you use DNSBLs in postscreen or SpamAssassin. In 
those cases the lookups get done asynchronously and all the answers are 
(or at least can be) logged. e.g:


Oct 11 18:45:14 bigsky postfix/dnsblog[94896]: addr 41.138.199.26 listed 
by domain blackholes.scconsult.com as 127.0.0.2
Oct 11 18:45:14 bigsky postfix/dnsblog[94893]: addr 41.138.199.26 listed 
by domain zen.spamhaus.org as 127.0.0.4
Oct 11 18:45:14 bigsky postfix/dnsblog[94889]: addr 41.138.199.26 listed 
by domain ix.dnsbl.manitu.net as 127.0.0.2


Either one of the last 2 on their own would be adequate for postscreen 
to reject the connection. You will note that the PIDs are in reverse 
order, indicating that the last dnsblog process spawned was the first to 
complete. This makes sense, as that DNS lookup never left the system's 
motherboard, while the others had to cross a WAN link and multiple 
routers.


My recent logs have no examples of multi-DNSBL messages making it to SA, 
because my config is designed to avoid the need to have SA look at mail, 
but when it does get a message that hits multiple DNSBLs, I see them all 
in the log of rule hits for ones that get rejected an also a header for 
the very rare case of them getting through (which is effectively 
impossible unless they are targeting postmaster@ or abuse@).


Re: PostFix as a "/dev/null" MTA?

2016-10-12 Thread lists
There are tips out there on how to set up a catch all account to accept mail 
that wasn't addressed to any known user. That is a (very) small part of your 
project. When you have a catch all, nothing bounces IF the email at least when 
to your FQDN. 

In your project, it would be a service to rate the RBLs, though in your setup 
you couldn't detect false positives‎. Maybe you should have one authorized 
user? Perhaps have two setups with at least on having a legitimate user plus 
catch-all and no open relay. That is, something close to a normal setup in 
addition to your accept anything server. 

You really can't rate RBLs in a normal setup since if one rejects the email, 
the others don't get a try. I have been changing the order that the RBLs appear 
in the configuration file with the assumption that the are used sequentially. I 
am working on a log filtering ‎script to determine which catches the most 
spammers, though as I said, the approach is flawed since not all RBLs get a 
fair shot. I put the better known RBLs like Baracuda at the bottom in the 
configuration file.


  Original Message  
From: Glenn Forbes Fleming Larratt
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 12:26 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: PostFix as a "/dev/null" MTA?

Folks,

I've done some searching of the list archives and the web, but I can't lay 
hands on an answer to this question:

- is there a way, ideally documented in a HOWTO or guide, to configure 
PostFix such that:

- it will accept any mail (think "open relay", but...);
- it will *never* attempt to forward that mail;
- it will *never* generate e-mail: no sent mail, no return receipts, 
no bounces, nothing?

The application we have in mind is a "Phish Phillet" engine, that would 
accept any mail sent to it, save the message locally, and process it using 
a home-grown set of analysis tools - DNS and whois queries, reputational 
databases, etc. - to rate messages and accumulate statistics about 
bad-actor mail senders and phishing sites.

Thanks!
-- 
Glenn Forbes Fleming Larratt
Cornell University IT Security Office


Re: PostFix as a "/dev/null" MTA?

2016-10-12 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 03:25:25PM -0400, Glenn Forbes Fleming Larratt wrote:

> I've done some searching of the list archives and the web, but I can't lay
> hands on an answer to this question:
> 
> - is there a way, ideally documented in a HOWTO or guide, to configure
> PostFix such that:
> 
> - it will accept any mail (think "open relay", but...);
> - it will *never* attempt to forward that mail;
> - it will *never* generate e-mail: no sent mail, no return receipts, no
>   bounces, nothing?

main.cf:

# Adjust as desired, this accepts 50MB messages:
#
message_size_limit = 52428800
mailbox_size_limit = 104857600
virtual_mailbox_limit = 104857600
queue_min_free = 104857600

# All domains are virtual mailbox domains
#
virtual_mailbox_domains = static:all
virtual_transport = virtual

# Splay out the mail into a pile of maildirs,
# one per virtual(8) process id.
#
virtual_mailbox_base = /var/spool/junkmail/
virtual_mailbox_maps = static:$process_id/

# Reserve an otherwise unused uid/gid, and create a group
# and account so it does not get later doubly allocated
#
virtual_uidgid = 10001
virtual_mailbox_uid_maps = static:$virtual_uidgid
virtual_mailbox_gid_maps = static:$virtual_uidgid

# With all domains final, no need for trusted clients
# All mail will accepted and delivered to local maildirs.
#
mynetworks =
smtpd_relay_restrictions = reject_unauth_destination
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = reject_unauth_destination
smtpd_client_restrictions =
smtpd_sender_restrictions =
smtpd_data_restrictions =
smtpd_end_of_data_restrictions =

header_checks =
nested_header_checks =
mime_header_checks =

# All the other address classes are now empty, but just
# in case bounce mail if this assumption fails.
#
content_filter =
transport_maps =
default_transport = error:5.1.2 Restricted destination

mydestination =
local_transport = $default_transport
alias_maps =
alias_database =
local_recipient_maps =

relay_domains =
relay_transport = $default_transport
relay_recipient_maps =

virtual_alias_domains =
virtual_alias_maps =

-- 
Viktor.


Re: PostFix as a "/dev/null" MTA?

2016-10-12 Thread Wietse Venema
Glenn Forbes Fleming Larratt:
> Folks,
> 
> I've done some searching of the list archives and the web, but I can't lay 
> hands on an answer to this question:
> 
> - is there a way, ideally documented in a HOWTO or guide, to configure 
> PostFix such that:
> 
>  - it will accept any mail (think "open relay", but...);
>  - it will *never* attempt to forward that mail;
>  - it will *never* generate e-mail: no sent mail, no return receipts, 
> no bounces, nothing?

You could use the Postfix smtp-sink program. It's been used as an
email trap in the past.

http://www.postfix.org/smtp-sink.1.html

Wietse


PostFix as a "/dev/null" MTA?

2016-10-12 Thread Glenn Forbes Fleming Larratt

Folks,

I've done some searching of the list archives and the web, but I can't lay 
hands on an answer to this question:


- is there a way, ideally documented in a HOWTO or guide, to configure 
PostFix such that:


- it will accept any mail (think "open relay", but...);
- it will *never* attempt to forward that mail;
- it will *never* generate e-mail: no sent mail, no return receipts, 
no bounces, nothing?


The application we have in mind is a "Phish Phillet" engine, that would 
accept any mail sent to it, save the message locally, and process it using 
a home-grown set of analysis tools - DNS and whois queries, reputational 
databases, etc. - to rate messages and accumulate statistics about 
bad-actor mail senders and phishing sites.


Thanks!
--
Glenn Forbes Fleming Larratt
Cornell University IT Security Office


Re: sieve sending vacation message from vm...@ns1.domain.tld

2016-10-12 Thread Wietse Venema
Matthew Broadhead:

[vaction messages sent by DOVECOT have vmail as the sender]

> I read somewhere it might have something to do with a line in master.cf
> dovecot   unix  -   n   n   -   -   pipe
> flags=DRhu user=vmail:mail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}

Maybe a question for the Dovecot list? After all the message is sent
by DOVECOT.

Wietse


sieve sending vacation message from vm...@ns1.domain.tld

2016-10-12 Thread Matthew Broadhead
I have a server running centos-release-7-2.1511.el7.centos.2.10.x86_64 
with postfix version postfix-2.10.1-6.el7.x86_64 and dovecot version 
2.2.10.  I am also using roundcube for webmail.  when a vacation filter 
(reply with message) is created in roundcube it adds a rule to 
managesieve.sieve in the user's mailbox.  everything works fine except 
the reply comes from vm...@ns1.domain.tld instead of u...@domain.tld. 
ns1.domain.tld is the fully qualified name of the server.


it used to work fine on my old CentOS 6 server so I am not sure what has 
changed.  Can anyone point me in the direction of where I can configure 
this behaviour?


I read somewhere it might have something to do with a line in master.cf
dovecot   unix  -   n   n   -   -   pipe
flags=DRhu user=vmail:mail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}

i changed it to
flags=DRhu user=vmail:mail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/dovecot-lda -f 
${sender} -d ${user}@${nexthop} -a ${original_recipient}


but it made no difference





Re: A script for generating a user Daily Mail Report

2016-10-12 Thread Ralph Seichter
On 12.10.16 02:11, @lbutlr wrote:

> No idea if this will be of interest to anyone, but my users are
> finding it useful so I’m sharing.

Thank you for sharing. Personally, I also find pflogsumm.pl very useful:

  https://jimsun.linxnet.com/postfix_contrib.html

I use Cron to run "pflogsumm.pl -d yesterday /var/log/mail" daily after
midnight on all my Postfix servers.

-Ralph