Re: Is reject_unknown_{reverse_}client_hostname safe?

Very handy postfix feature.. Mal On 8/04/2018 6:33 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > I have "warn_if_reject reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname" to > test the waters, and I don't feel an urge to make that a hard reject.

Re: Is reject_unknown_{reverse_}client_hostname safe?

Daniele Nicolodi: > Hello, > > I have been using > > smtpd_relay_restrictions = > ... > reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname All features like this can block legitimate email. There is no guarantee that someone won't break a good configuration, especially when MAIL, DNS, and FIREWALL are

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

Hi Viktor, > On Apr 7, 2018, at 1:32 PM, Viktor Dukhovni > wrote: > > It is now portable POSIX. For the record, in email the allowed whitespace is > more narrow than > is recognized by [[:space:]], you're not likely to run into any false > positives. The email >

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

> On Apr 7, 2018, at 3:05 AM, J Doe wrote: > > Thank you for your reply. > > It occurred to me that I could side-step the issue of GNU extensions and > whether they’re supported by converting the string I e-mailed a couple of > e-mails back to full POSIX regex (in

Is reject_unknown_{reverse_}client_hostname safe?

Hello, I have been using smtpd_relay_restrictions = ... reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname warn_if_reject reject_unknown_client_hostname ... for a long while in my configuration, where the warn_if_reject is there because I thought that the more strict check could have blocked some

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

Hi Viktor and Dominic, > On Apr 7, 2018, at 2:46 AM, Dominic Raferd wrote: > > On 7 April 2018 at 07:39, J Doe > wrote: > Hi Viktor and Dominic, > > If I do the following on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS: > > $

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

On 7 April 2018 at 07:39, J Doe wrote: > Hi Viktor and Dominic, > > If I do the following on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS: > > $ echo "1 2" | egrep '[[:digit:]]\s[[:digit:]]’ > 1 2 > > … where “1 2” are highlighted in bash > > Am I correct that since this POSIX regex for

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

Hi Viktor and Dominic, If I do the following on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS: $ echo "1 2" | egrep '[[:digit:]]\s[[:digit:]]’ 1 2 … where “1 2” are highlighted in bash Am I correct that since this POSIX regex for the digits AND the \s is still being interpreted, my system must support the GNU

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

Hi Viktor, > On Apr 7, 2018, at 2:04 AM, Viktor Dukhovni > wrote: > > FreeBSD 11 (POSIX): > > $ echo "1 b" | egrep '\d\s\w' > $ > > MacOS High Sierra (POSIX with GNU or similar extensions): > > $ echo "1 b" | egrep '\d\s\w' > 1 b > $ > > Your Ubuntu system

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

On 7 April 2018 at 07:04, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > > On Apr 7, 2018, at 1:59 AM, J Doe wrote: > > > > Ah, interesting - that must be it, then. > > > > This is on an Ubuntu 16.04 LTS server. I can see the dependencies > compiled in from

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

> On Apr 7, 2018, at 1:59 AM, J Doe wrote: > > Ah, interesting - that must be it, then. > > This is on an Ubuntu 16.04 LTS server. I can see the dependencies compiled > in from Ubuntu’s page [1] and GNU libc is listed. [2] seems to suggest that > regular

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

Hi Viktor, > On Apr 7, 2018, at 1:50 AM, Viktor Dukhovni > wrote: > >> On Apr 7, 2018, at 1:34 AM, J Doe wrote: >> >> mmm. I just sent a test message via submission to a Gmail account and >> checked the headers and the replacement