Re: Question about message_drop_headers and DKIM

J Doe: > BUT . . . If message_drop_headers is extracting some header > information *BEFORE* running the OpenDKIM Milter, how is it that > DKIM is not breaking ? That is because the DKIM signature covers only the headers that are mentioned in the signature. Wietse

Question about message_drop_headers and DKIM

Hi, I have a question regarding the message_drop_headers main.cf configuration parameter. The man page states that it: “[specifies] names of message headers that the cleanup(8) daemon will remove after applying header_checks(5) and *BEFORE* invoking Milter applications...”

Re: Removal or obfuscation of mail_name

Hi Victor, >> I was wondering (and I know the gains would be minor given that this >> falls into security through obscurity), is there anything to gain by >> either removing this or specifying something false ? > > There is nothing to be gained by pretending your server is not running >

Re: MacOS High Sierra (10.13) and Postfix relaying

Are you using the postfix that comes with Mac OS X Server? That is, the version that is pre-configured to use dovecot, spamassasin, clamav, and ldap? Or are you configuring postfix from scratch? James > On Nov 6, 2017, at 11:19 AM, Larry Stone wrote: > >

Re: Removal or obfuscation of mail_name

> On Nov 6, 2017, at 2:26 PM, J Doe wrote: > > I was reading about the mail_name parameter in main.cf. > > I was wondering (and I know the gains would be minor given that this > falls into security through obscurity), is there anything to gain by > either removing

Removal or obfuscation of mail_name

Hello, I was reading about the mail_name parameter in main.cf. I was wondering (and I know the gains would be minor given that this falls into security through obscurity), is there anything to gain by either removing this or specifying something false ? Is there any third-party servers or

Re: Propper way to deliver email messages to gmail

Thanks a lot for your answers. They really helped me. :) On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > >> On Nov 5, 2017, at 3:27 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote: >> >> BTW if for some reason you did want to deliver "@example.com" to >> Google,

Re: MacOS High Sierra (10.13) and Postfix relaying

Exactly although Postfix stuff should go to /var/log/mail.log (mine does). It was Viktor who suggested doing that - he’s much more an expert on the internals involved. I build (make) on 10.9.5, then tar the directory, copy it to the target system, untar, and then make upgrade. Works fine

Re: MacOS High Sierra (10.13) and Postfix relaying

Larry, Can you explain what you mean by the current Apple logging system? You mean the unified logging? Are you avoiding this by building postfix on 10.9.5 and then copying it to a 10.12+ computer so that it logs to /var/log/system.log instead? You haven't had any other problems doing this?

Re: bloc domains with all variants of tld

> On Nov 6, 2017, at 12:45 PM, @lbutlr wrote: > > > # cat /etc/postfix/helo_checks.pcre > […] > /.*infusionmail.com$/ 550 Infusionmail is not wanted or welcome > /.*\yahoo\.com/ 550 Yahoo.com is not allowed here, use gmail or someone who > hasn't leaked 3 billion

Re: bloc domains with all variants of tld

On 6 Nov 2017, at 08:08, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > Mind you, I would not recommend such rules to anyone. Just block the > domains specifically observed to send unwanted email. If you really > want to block all tlds, there are only 1510 live at present and 31 > in

Re: bloc domains with all variants of tld

On 6 November 2017 at 15:08, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > > On Nov 6, 2017, at 6:15 AM, Dominic Raferd > wrote: > > > > ​So say use pcre and study http://www.postfix.org/pcre_table.5.html. > Example (untested): > > > > /@example\..*​$/ REJECT

Re: bloc domains with all variants of tld

> On Nov 6, 2017, at 6:15 AM, Dominic Raferd wrote: > > > We need to bloc some incoming emails from certain domains. > > How to write rules to bloc a domain with all its variant of tld? > > ​So say use pcre and study http://www.postfix.org/pcre_table.5.html. Example

RE: bloc domains with all variants of tld

This is interesting, and I am curious to know the answer as well. We have an application where denying all tlds and then allowing in certain ones would be very useful. (Default reject, allow only whitelisted). Michael Munger, dCAP, MCPS, MCNPS, MBSS High Powered Help, Inc. Microsoft Certified

it's working as i want??

Hi to all. I have two servers, in one Zimbra and in another Postfix. I want that zimbra use that postfix to send and receive. It seems working because im receiving mails and sending mails, I doubt if the mails are coming out of zimbra or postfix zimbra : 192.168.1.120 This is the log from

Re: bloc domains with all variants of tld

On 6 November 2017 at 10:43, wodel youchi wrote: > Hi, > > both are supported pcre and regexp. > > > > 2017-11-06 11:07 GMT+01:00 Ralph Seichter : > >> On 06.11.2017 10:26, wodel youchi wrote: >> >> > We need to bloc some incoming emails from

Re: bloc domains with all variants of tld

Hi, both are supported pcre and regexp. Regards. Garanti sans virus. www.avast.com

Re: bloc domains with all variants of tld

On 06.11.2017 10:26, wodel youchi wrote: > We need to bloc some incoming emails from certain domains. > How to write rules to bloc a domain with all its variant of tld? Access tables can support regexp or pcre, if your Postfix has been compiled that way. The postconf -m command will show you

bloc domains with all variants of tld

Hi, We need to bloc some incoming emails from certain domains. How to write rules to bloc a domain with all its variant of tld? if we want to bloc the example domain we write the rules like this example.com REJECT example.fr REJECT example.de REJECT etc... How to write one rule to