Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
* Carlos Mennens carlosw...@gmail.com:
 Today I received a ticket for altering the way my Postfix server
 handles mail and I don't understand it. The ticket / request is pasted
 below:
 
 **
 According to RFC 4409 client mail submission to an email server is
 supposed to use port 587.
 Server to server SMTP relays are to use port 25.
 When I am not at the office, I can't email via my work (Postfix)
 account via my iphone or my residential internet because my ISP(s)
 filter port 25 to only allow traffic to and from their mail servers.
 They do however allow 587 anywhere per RFC 4409.
 Additionally I can't email to the IDE with my gmail account, this is
 becoming a real pain in the ass when I need to send emails with
 attachments.
 Just to send this email I am having to relay off my own server in California.
 Can we please get the proper ports opened on the mail server?
 
 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4409.txt
 **
 
 Now my question is I just want to be sure I'm correct in assuming that
 all mail servers send on port 25, correct? This user just is
 requesting me to allow relay access from his phone carriers network or
 home ISP which I'm not going to do since this is the reason I manage
 webmail for users.

Is he able to relay via port 25 now?

 Does the above request seem legit or strange? I don't know enough about
 Postfix / mail  port 587 to know if this is a legit request.

Legit request.
Like he said, he cannot reach port 25, so 587 (submission) is the
preferred option.

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt
  Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
  Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
  Campus Benjamin Franklin
  Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin
  Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962
  ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de



Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Reindl Harald
587 is AUTHENTICATED submission and should be
preferred since more and more providers blocking
spam-bots by clsoing outgoing port 25 for homeusers

submission inet n - n - 50 smtpd -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes -o
smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject

he is NOT requesting to allow relay access, he is requesting
ANY access to your smtp-server because he can not use port 25

Am 18.08.2011 14:53, schrieb Carlos Mennens:
 Today I received a ticket for altering the way my Postfix server
 handles mail and I don't understand it. The ticket / request is pasted
 below:
 
 **
 According to RFC 4409 client mail submission to an email server is
 supposed to use port 587.
 Server to server SMTP relays are to use port 25.
 When I am not at the office, I can't email via my work (Postfix)
 account via my iphone or my residential internet because my ISP(s)
 filter port 25 to only allow traffic to and from their mail servers.
 They do however allow 587 anywhere per RFC 4409.
 Additionally I can't email to the IDE with my gmail account, this is
 becoming a real pain in the ass when I need to send emails with
 attachments.
 Just to send this email I am having to relay off my own server in California.
 Can we please get the proper ports opened on the mail server?
 
 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4409.txt
 **
 
 Now my question is I just want to be sure I'm correct in assuming that
 all mail servers send on port 25, correct? This user just is
 requesting me to allow relay access from his phone carriers network or
 home ISP which I'm not going to do since this is the reason I manage
 webmail for users. Does the above request seem legit or strange? I
 don't know enough about Postfix / mail  port 587 to know if this is a
 legit request.
 
 Thanks for any clarification!

-- 

Mit besten Grüßen, Reindl Harald
the lounge interactive design GmbH
A-1060 Vienna, Hofmühlgasse 17
CTO / software-development / cms-solutions
p: +43 (1) 595 3999 33, m: +43 (676) 40 221 40
icq: 154546673, http://www.thelounge.net/

http://www.thelounge.net/signature.asc.what.htm



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Matt Hayes



On 8/18/2011 8:53 AM, Carlos Mennens wrote:

Today I received a ticket for altering the way my Postfix server
handles mail and I don't understand it. The ticket / request is pasted
below:

**
According to RFC 4409 client mail submission to an email server is
supposed to use port 587.
Server to server SMTP relays are to use port 25.
When I am not at the office, I can't email via my work (Postfix)
account via my iphone or my residential internet because my ISP(s)
filter port 25 to only allow traffic to and from their mail servers.
They do however allow 587 anywhere per RFC 4409.
Additionally I can't email to the IDE with my gmail account, this is
becoming a real pain in the ass when I need to send emails with
attachments.
Just to send this email I am having to relay off my own server in California.
Can we please get the proper ports opened on the mail server?

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4409.txt
**

Now my question is I just want to be sure I'm correct in assuming that
all mail servers send on port 25, correct? This user just is
requesting me to allow relay access from his phone carriers network or
home ISP which I'm not going to do since this is the reason I manage
webmail for users. Does the above request seem legit or strange? I
don't know enough about Postfix / mail  port 587 to know if this is a
legit request.

Thanks for any clarification!



Carlos,

This is a direct quote from a bot running in #postfix on freenode:

Port 587 is submission, for user submission of mail, NOT suitable for 
mail exchange. See the commented example in master.cf. also
  see !msa, and rfc 2476 and 4409. Also read 
http://www.maawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/MAAWG_Port25rec0511.pdf


Also have a look at:

http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html

-Matt


Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt
* Carlos Mennens carlosw...@gmail.com:
 On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Matt Hayes domin...@slackadelic.com wrote:
  Carlos,
 
  This is a direct quote from a bot running in #postfix on freenode:
 
  Port 587 is submission, for user submission of mail, NOT suitable for mail
  exchange. See the commented example in master.cf. also
                       see !msa, and rfc 2476 and 4409. Also read
  http://www.maawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/MAAWG_Port25rec0511.pdf
 
  Also have a look at:
 
  http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html
 
 Thanks! So I would need to modify my 'master.cf' to activly support
 client to server communication via port 587, correct?

Yes, and maybe the firewall

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt
  Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
  Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
  Campus Benjamin Franklin
  Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin
  Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962
  ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de



Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Matt Hayes

On 8/18/2011 9:13 AM, Carlos Mennens wrote:

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Matt Hayesdomin...@slackadelic.com  wrote:

Carlos,

This is a direct quote from a bot running in #postfix on freenode:

Port 587 is submission, for user submission of mail, NOT suitable for mail
exchange. See the commented example in master.cf. also
  see !msa, and rfc 2476 and 4409. Also read
http://www.maawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/MAAWG_Port25rec0511.pdf

Also have a look at:

http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html


Thanks! So I would need to modify my 'master.cf' to activly support
client to server communication via port 587, correct?



Essentially yes.  The SASL readme is a good read as well as the example 
already contained within master.cf


-Matt


Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Reindl Harald


Am 18.08.2011 15:23, schrieb Jeroen Geilman:
 On 2011-08-18 14:59, Reindl Harald wrote:
 587 is AUTHENTICATED submission
 
 Says who ?

have you ever seen submission as open-relay?
if yes - where and why does nonone shutdown this machine?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Jeroen Geilman

On 2011-08-18 15:27, Reindl Harald wrote:


Am 18.08.2011 15:23, schrieb Jeroen Geilman:

On 2011-08-18 14:59, Reindl Harald wrote:

587 is AUTHENTICATED submission

Says who ?

have you ever seen submission as open-relay?
if yes - where and why does nonone shutdown this machine?



Submission can take place on a trusted local network.
This does not make you an open relay.

--
J.



Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Thomas Berger

Am Donnerstag, 18. August 2011, 15:23:28 schrieb Jeroen Geilman:
 On 2011-08-18 14:59, Reindl Harald wrote:
 
  587 is AUTHENTICATED submission
 
 
 Says who ?
Port 587 is AUTHORIZED submission, NOT AUTHENTICATED. 

A limitation to a local network ist also a kind of authorization.
 

 
 Thomas Berger 
 - Certified Linux/Cisco Networking Engineer - 
 BOREUS Rechenzentrum GmbH 
 Zur Schwedenschanze 2 
 D - 18435 Stralsund 
 Germany 
 Phone:+49 (0) 38 31 - 36 76 415 
 Fax: +49 (0) 38 31 - 36 76 615 
 eMail: t...@boreus.de 
 Internet: http://www.boreus.de/ 
 -- 
 Geschäftsführer: André Jahns, Holger Lebrecht 
 Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Stralsund HRB 5750 
 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Stralsund


Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Jeroen Geilman

On 2011-08-18 17:39, Thomas Berger wrote:

Am Donnerstag, 18. August 2011, 15:23:28 schrieb Jeroen Geilman:

On 2011-08-18 14:59, Reindl Harald wrote:


587 is AUTHENTICATED submission


Says who ?

Port 587 is AUTHORIZED submission, NOT AUTHENTICATED.


Um, no.

RFC 4409, section 4.3 states that an MSA *must* require authentication 
on connections that are not implicitly trusted (such as a secured local 
network).


SMTP AUTH is the preferred mechanism, but the RFC does not limit 
authentication to SMPT AUTH.


This is now a Draft standard, meaning you'd better follow it (HTML has 
never progressed beyond a draft standard in the 10+ years that v4.01 is 
in use)


This requirement is updated from RFC 2476, where it was optional, but 
RFC 4409 is from April 2006 (a good 5 years ago), so let's assume people 
have read it by now.



--
J.



Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread John Hinton

On 8/18/2011 11:39 AM, Thomas Berger wrote:

Am Donnerstag, 18. August 2011, 15:23:28 schrieb Jeroen Geilman:

On 2011-08-18 14:59, Reindl Harald wrote:


587 is AUTHENTICATED submission


Says who ?

Port 587 is AUTHORIZED submission, NOT AUTHENTICATED.

A limitation to a local network ist also a kind of authorization.

Either way, we seem to be adding confusion to the original question.

I like to 'think about' ports as highway routes. If you are connected to 
'bigprovider.com', they know you are a user because you are connected 
(sent login information), so using 'mail.bigprovider.com' on port 25 is 
open... the highway route is open inside of the town so to speak. But, 
there is a roadblock on the edge of town (bigprovider.com) and they have 
a detour set up to use highway 587 instead, so the only way out of town 
is route 587. Anyone living in town (on that providers internet 
connection) must take the detour to get outside to another town 
(mail.someotherprovider.com).


I'm slowly seeing most providers closing port 25, some even one 
area/region at a time (Verizon comes to mind). So far for my clients, 
all have 587 available and working when 25 is blocked.


If you aren't the internet service provider and if you allow more than 
only webmail access, you pretty much have to have 587 set up for use 
both in firewall settings and mailserver conf. Other ports and settings 
may also be needed for TLS connections which is becoming the default in 
most email clients these days.


A side note... some public connections, like internet cafe's do not 
allow sending any email through any port. Only webmail works in those 
locations. I suppose this is a good idea to prevent a visiting spammer 
from compromising your reputation.


If you allow email client access, such as Outlook, your customer is 
exactly right that your system is not providing a top or full level of 
service.


John Hinton




  Thomas Berger
  - Certified Linux/Cisco Networking Engineer -
  BOREUS Rechenzentrum GmbH
  Zur Schwedenschanze 2
  D - 18435 Stralsund
  Germany
  Phone:+49 (0) 38 31 - 36 76 415
  Fax: +49 (0) 38 31 - 36 76 615
  eMail: t...@boreus.de
  Internet: http://www.boreus.de/
  --
  Geschäftsführer: André Jahns, Holger Lebrecht
  Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Stralsund HRB 5750
  Sitz der Gesellschaft: Stralsund




RE: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
 -Original Message-
 From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org 
 [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Jeroen Geilman
 Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 9:03 AM
 To: postfix-users@postfix.org
 Subject: Re: Request For Port 587
 
 This is now a Draft standard, meaning you'd better follow it (HTML has
 never progressed beyond a draft standard in the 10+ years that v4.01 is
 in use)
 
 This requirement is updated from RFC 2476, where it was optional, but
 RFC 4409 is from April 2006 (a good 5 years ago), so let's assume people
 have read it by now.

Even better, it's now being considered by the IETF for promotion to Full 
Standard.  And there actually aren't very many of those (there are about 6300 
RFCs, but fewer than 100 full standards).


Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread Ansgar Wiechers
On 2011-08-18 Jeroen Geilman wrote:
 On 2011-08-18 14:59, Reindl Harald wrote:
 587 is AUTHENTICATED submission
 
 Says who ?

Chapter 4.3 of RFC 4409, unless I'm misunderstanding something.

Regards
Ansgar Wiechers
-- 
Abstractions save us time working, but they don't save us time learning.
--Joel Spolsky


Re: Request For Port 587

2011-08-18 Thread mouss
Le 18/08/2011 14:53, Carlos Mennens a écrit :
 Today I received a ticket for altering the way my Postfix server
 handles mail and I don't understand it. The ticket / request is pasted
 below:
 
 **
 According to RFC 4409 client mail submission to an email server is
 supposed to use port 587.
 Server to server SMTP relays are to use port 25.
 When I am not at the office, I can't email via my work (Postfix)
 account via my iphone or my residential internet because my ISP(s)
 filter port 25 to only allow traffic to and from their mail servers.
 They do however allow 587 anywhere per RFC 4409.
 Additionally I can't email to the IDE with my gmail account, this is
 becoming a real pain in the ass when I need to send emails with
 attachments.
 Just to send this email I am having to relay off my own server in California.
 Can we please get the proper ports opened on the mail server?
 
 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4409.txt
 **
 
 Now my question is I just want to be sure I'm correct in assuming that
 all mail servers send on port 25, correct? This user just is
 requesting me to allow relay access from his phone carriers network or
 home ISP which I'm not going to do since this is the reason I manage
 webmail for users. Does the above request seem legit or strange? I
 don't know enough about Postfix / mail  port 587 to know if this is a
 legit request.
 
 Thanks for any clarification!

user request is legitimate. in the past, port 25 was used for all smtp
traffic, be that inbound mail (MX service) or outbound mail.

to fight zombie spam, ISPs are encouraged to block traffic to and from
port 25 (the from part is less obvious: it has to do with asymmetric
routing). so real users would either use thei ISP relay (not always
acceptable) or use a different port, which is what the submission port
(587) is for.

note that you need to enforce authentication on this port. and if
login/password is used, then you must establish a good policy (password
strength if possible, password change, ...). you can also use
certificates (even software certs, since zombie attackers are mostly
after passwords).