This may have been raised before:
we received quite a few malicious emails (containing malicious attachments)
& on tracing the senders' IP (from the 'Internet Headers' of the received
mails) & key into one of the services below, noted they are malicious
& then we manually block them but by then
On 12/16/2016 10:27 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 09:56:26AM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
>> No fixes are necessary, other than maybe I should write a tutorial
>> on reading logs.
>
> Oh, a LOG_README, an excellent idea! Later it can branch out into
> the various configuration
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 09:56:26AM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
> No fixes are necessary, other than maybe I should write a tutorial
> on reading logs.
Oh, a LOG_README, an excellent idea! Later it can branch out into
the various configuration knobs we might eventually see.
Do you think you could
> No fixes are necessary, other than maybe I should write a tutorial
> on reading logs.
>
> -- Noel Jones
+1 In particular, your writing style is exceptionally clear!
Michael
On 12/16/2016 5:13 AM, L.P.H. van Belle wrote:
> Maybe im totaly incorrect here so correct me if needed.
Yes.
> Now, Im running Debian Wheezy, postfix ( debian backport )
> 2.11.2-1~bpo70+1. Kernel : 3.2.82-1
>
> I’ve increased the debug level in postfix for the domains.
Don't use debug
> On Dec 16, 2016, at 1:39 AM, Alice Wonder wrote:
>
> When an SMTP server publishes a TLSA record, will DANE enforcing SMTP servers
> refuse to connect if the TLSA record matches the certificate but the
> certificate has expired?
That depends on the TLSA records:
>Now, here is an inconistany of logging ( i think ) by postfix.
>
>I point to this line,: ?sweeper2.stater.com[193.172.8.206]:25:
>220-sweeper.stater.com ESMTP ?
>
>More consistand would be (sweeper2.stater.com[193.172.8.206]):25:
>220-sweeper.stater.com ESMTP ?
The form:
client: request
Pedro David Marco:
>
>
> >Given your smtpd_mumble_restrictions rule, permit_mynetworks allows
> >a client to skip the reject_unverified_whatever check.
> > Wietse
>
> why Wietse? permit_mynetworks is on first place and should basically only
> allow loopback according tomynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8
On 14 September 2016 at 13:42, Dominic Raferd wrote:
> Thanks for your quick reply Viktor. OK now I understand that what I am
> trying to do can't be done. If someone could implement the feature you
> suggest (wrapper mode is enabled conditionally, only when the port is
Hello,
After the message from yesterday, im asking if the postfix logging can be
changed.
To improve the loggings and a better more clear reject message.
A small change maybe, i dont know, i’ll show what i mean below.
Maybe im totaly incorrect here so correct me if needed.
Now,
>Given your smtpd_mumble_restrictions rule, permit_mynetworks allows
>a client to skip the reject_unverified_whatever check.
> Wietse
why Wietse? permit_mynetworks is on first place and should basically only allow
loopback according tomynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8 [:::127.0.0.0]/104 [::1]/128
11 matches
Mail list logo