Doug Traylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > if you've got the Relay Host and Relay Port set in ASSP,
> > only mail received by ASSP on Relay Port will be forwarded to Relay Host,
>
> Yes
>
> > and only mail received by ASSP on Listen Port will be forwarded to SMTP
> > Destination?
>
> Yes
>
> > C
> if you've got the Relay Host and Relay Port set in ASSP,
> only mail received by ASSP on Relay Port will be forwarded to Relay Host,
Yes
> and only mail received by ASSP on Listen Port will be forwarded to SMTP
> Destination?
Yes
> Can I further assume that mail received by ASSP on Relay Port
Doug Traylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Why not use DNS for delivery in Vexira instead of setting a "destination
> smtp server"? Is that not possible in Vexira? Since it runs on a different
> machine than your mail server qmail, you could point all the domains you
> manage to your qmail's local
Charles Marcus ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > eGW has a growing list of modules, we only use calendaring and addressbook
> > with email. Technically, I'm happy with it, but our users complain bitterly
> > about the lack of functionality in the email client.
>
> Thanks for the reply...
>
> Sounds
> Since Vexira has only one destination smtp server setting, I can't set
> ASSP's
> Relay Host to Vexira, and since I'd prefer to not install yet another smtp
> relay, how about this: I configure ASSP with a Relay Port and configure
> eGW to
> connect to this port, I then configure ASSP to use my
> eGW has a growing list of modules, we only use calendaring and addressbook
> with email. Technically, I'm happy with it, but our users complain bitterly
> about the lack of functionality in the email client.
Thanks for the reply...
Sounds like I'll need to try it out. We only use IMAP, so hope
Doug Traylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> egroupware is just a client, has no SMTP service and therefore does not do
> any type of "delivery". It can be configured to access your MTA's IMAP and
> SMTP services right? Set eGroupWare to use qmail's smtp as before. Set
> qmail to forward all outg
Charles Marcus ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> By the way... how do you like eGroupware? I had never heard of it.
> Specifically, how is the mail client? The screenshots don't have
> anything for the mail client, and the demo install gives errors when
> trying to access the mail client.
>
> --
>
> Be
> Doug Traylor wrote:
>> egroupware is just a client, has no SMTP service and therefore does not
>> do
>> any type of "delivery".
>
> By the way... how do you like eGroupware? I had never heard of it.
> Specifically, how is the mail client? The screenshots don't have
> anything for the mail client
Doug Traylor wrote:
> egroupware is just a client, has no SMTP service and therefore does not do
> any type of "delivery".
By the way... how do you like eGroupware? I had never heard of it.
Specifically, how is the mail client? The screenshots don't have
anything for the mail client, and the de
egroupware is just a client, has no SMTP service and therefore does not do
any type of "delivery". It can be configured to access your MTA's IMAP and
SMTP services right? Set eGroupWare to use qmail's smtp as before. Set
qmail to forward all outgoing mail to smtp gateway where ASSP is listeni
Doug Traylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Whitelisting has nothing to do with Internal->Internal or local->local mail,
> it is only for External->Internal mail. Communications between internal
> employees is different then business comunication from the world to us so
> the added non-spam generat
Doug Traylor wrote:
> Even if we had external users(not physically connected to our internal
> network), we would have their email clients connect directly to our MTA on
> auth port 587 that wuold then send from the MTA through ASSP the same way
> for outgoing only. All outgoing email is routed
>> My internal email does not go to ASSP. All my internal clients,
>> including
>> from VPN traffic, goes directly to our email server application. Only
>> email
>> that is routed to the outside or from the outside goes through ASSP and
>> my
>> AV layers. I have very strict rules in place fo
Doug Traylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> My internal email does not go to ASSP. All my internal clients, including
> from VPN traffic, goes directly to our email server application. Only email
> that is routed to the outside or from the outside goes through ASSP and my
> AV layers. I have very
> I have a tough time believing no-one has run into this problem before - if
> you
> run a separate virus/spam filter that sits between your ASSP and mail
> servers,
> virus checking will continue to function, but spam filtering will suffer
> (on
> the separate spam filter) due to the changed so
Hi,
Matti Haack schrieb:
>
> DT> So far today (17 hours) ASSP 1.2.7(36) has blocked 400 emails with bad
> DT> attachments, and missed 300 Uuencoded files which were then found to be
> DT> viral by my SMTP AV scanner. Granted I am not using Clamd with ASSP due
> to
> DT> the prior performance de
Fritz Borgstedt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>
> >Is this possible to do with ASSP? Any help would be greatly
> >appreciated.
>
> It would be possible to use the ClamAV viruschecker inside ASSP and
> skip your extra viruschecker altogether.
> You can define in ASSP if it should skip local mails.
>
>it would be nice for ASSP to
>reject all those Uuencoded emails containing EXE viruses too without
>the
>overhead of having to scan them.
did you ever use level 4?
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Jo
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>If you read your clamd.log file, do you see any entries for
>Trojan.Downloader-647 or Trojan.Downloader-648?
today they mutated))
Jan-21-07 13:54:24 212.227.126.177
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] virus
detected '
DT> So far today (17 hours) ASSP 1.2.7(36) has blocked 400 emails with bad
DT> attachments, and missed 300 Uuencoded files which were then found to be
DT> viral by my SMTP AV scanner. Granted I am not using Clamd with ASSP due to
DT> the prior performance degredation, but... it would be nice for
On 21/01/2007, at 9:03 PM, Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
>
>>
>> If you read your clamd.log file, do you see any entries for
>> Trojan.Downloader-647 or Trojan.Downloader-648? Those are from the
>> recent
>> "Storm Worm" which should be called the "Recent News Worm" since it
>> has a
>> subject line fr
>
>If you read your clamd.log file, do you see any entries for
>Trojan.Downloader-647 or Trojan.Downloader-648? Those are from the
>recent
>"Storm Worm" which should be called the "Recent News Worm" since it
>has a
>subject line from recent news items, or false news items.
yes. The problem he
On 21/01/2007, at 11:26 AM, Doug Traylor wrote:
>
>> I have just had two of these emails get through ASSP 1.2.7.1 (54) and
>> it's ClamAV.
>>
>> Perhaps ClamAV has not had its virus defs updated to include this
>> virus?
>>
>> Also, it has allowed this .exe file pass through, even though I am
>
>I have just had two of these emails get through ASSP 1.2.7.1 (54) and
> it's ClamAV.
>
> Perhaps ClamAV has not had its virus defs updated to include this virus?
>
> Also, it has allowed this .exe file pass through, even though I am
> using External Attachment Blocking level 1, so no .exe files s
>> I am not talking "ASSP integrated ClamAV", i am talking about using
>> full ClamAV from ASSP with the help from File::Scan::ClamAV, which
>> was introduced with some problems in 1.2.6 and is now rewritten nicely
>> in 1.2.7.
>>
>> No virus or worm came through my 3 ASSP installations the last
I have just had two of these emails get through ASSP 1.2.7.1 (54) and
it's ClamAV.
Perhaps ClamAV has not had its virus defs updated to include this virus?
Also, it has allowed this .exe file pass through, even though I am
using External Attachment Blocking level 1, so no .exe files should
> I am not talking "ASSP integrated ClamAV", i am talking about using
> full ClamAV from ASSP with the help from File::Scan::ClamAV, which
> was introduced with some problems in 1.2.6 and is now rewritten nicely
> in 1.2.7.
>
> No virus or worm came through my 3 ASSP installations the last days.
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>Before this latest
>run, very few Uuencoded virus attachments made it through ASSP, but
>anyone
>relying on ASSP/ClamAV to protect then from this latest 'Storm Worm"
>virus
>run will be hosed.
I am not talking "ASSP int
> It would be possible to use the ClamAV viruschecker inside ASSP and
> skip your extra viruschecker altogether.
> You can define in ASSP if it should skip local mails.
Fritz,
Are you advocating using the ASSP integrated ClamAV as the only AntiVirus
checker in the email stream for incoming email
>Is this possible to do with ASSP? Any help would be greatly
>appreciated.
It would be possible to use the ClamAV viruschecker inside ASSP and
skip your extra viruschecker altogether.
You can define in ASSP if it should skip local mails.
>
-
31 matches
Mail list logo
