Re: Mail sent thru submission to user on same server.

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:02:35PM -0400, post...@ptld.com wrote: > If I send mail to submission:587 addressed to another user on the same > server, postfix instead of sending the mail to the mx records for that > domain, and connecting to postfix on smtp:25 it bypasses all of that and > delive

Mail sent thru submission to user on same server.

If i send mail to submission:587 addressed to another user on the same server, postfix instead of sending the mail to the mx records for that domain, and connecting to postfix on smtp:25 it bypasses all of that and delivers directly into that users inbox. This avoids all of my filtering, smtpd_

Re: dkim=pass but unprotected

It's not dnssec signed. -Dan Mahoney > On May 17, 2021, at 6:14 PM, post...@ptld.com wrote: > > I noticed in the headers it shows: > > dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) > > What does the unprotected part refer to? > Anything to worry about? Something i need to setup or configure? > I googl

Re: Cannot connect to email server with client; postfix logs errors

On 2021-05-17 at 19:02:10 UTC-0400 (Mon, 17 May 2021 18:02:10 -0500) Nathan Dehnel is rumored to have said: I am setting up a new email server, and I am unable to connect to it with Icedove, and postfix logs errors when I attempt to do so. I am using postfix + dovecot + opendkim + spamassassin

dkim=pass but unprotected

I noticed in the headers it shows: dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) What does the unprotected part refer to? Anything to worry about? Something i need to setup or configure? I googled but didn't find anything, just people talking about why their dkim didn't pass. I notice emails from gmail

Re: Bind Submission IPv4 & IPv6 in Master.cf

On 2021-05-18 00:29, Noel Jones wrote: 127.0.0.1:submission inet n - n - - smtpd [::1]:submission inet n - n - - smtpd localhost:submission inet n - n - - smtpd imho postfix will accept this aswell, not tested

Re: Submission Only, Not Listening on 25.

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 05:57:35PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > Comment out the service in master.cf that listens on port 25. > > Command: postconf -# -M smtp/inet > > Result: # smtp inet n ... ... ... ... smtpd A fancier, but more easily programmatically reversed m

Re: Submission Only, Not Listening on 25.

On 2021-05-17 23:39, post...@ptld.com wrote: I am setting up a postfix instance as submission only to compliment dovecot in imap mode. +1 Is there a way to turn off listening on port 25 and only have submission listen on 587? put # in front of smtp line in master.cf should be it I already

Cannot connect to email server with client; postfix logs errors

I am setting up a new email server, and I am unable to connect to it with Icedove, and postfix logs errors when I attempt to do so. I am using postfix + dovecot + opendkim + spamassassin. Systemd log: May 17 15:28:22 gentooserver systemd[1]: Starting Postfix Mail Transport Agent... May 17 15:28:2

Re: Bind Submission IPv4 & IPv6 in Master.cf

On 5/17/2021 5:20 PM, post...@ptld.com wrote: New problem, i can not specify two IP's in the master.cf for submission to bind to. This works: 127.0.0.1:submission inet n - n - - smtpd This works: [::1]:submission inet n - n - - smtpd This does not work: 127.0.0.1,[::1]:submission inet n - n

Bind Submission IPv4 & IPv6 in Master.cf

New problem, i can not specify two IP's in the master.cf for submission to bind to. This works: 127.0.0.1:submission inet n - n - - smtpd This works: [::1]:submission inet n - n - - smtpd This does not work: 127.0.0.1,[::1]:submission inet n - n - - smtpd 127.0.0.1 [::1]:submission inet n - n

Re: Submission Only, Not Listening on 25.

> > > I am setting up a postfix instance as submission only to compliment > dovecot in imap mode. > Is there a way to turn off listening on port 25 and only have submission > listen on 587? > I already know how to bind the submission service to 587 in the > master.cf Any service could be commente

Re: Submission Only, Not Listening on 25.

post...@ptld.com: > I am setting up a postfix instance as submission only to compliment > dovecot in imap mode. > Is there a way to turn off listening on port 25 and only have submission > listen on 587? Comment out the service in master.cf that listens on port 25. Command: postconf -# -M smtp/

Submission Only, Not Listening on 25.

I am setting up a postfix instance as submission only to compliment dovecot in imap mode. Is there a way to turn off listening on port 25 and only have submission listen on 587? I already know how to bind the submission service to 587 in the master.cf I assume listening on 25 is controlled by

Re: SASL and PAM

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:07:40AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > Bill Cole: > > On 2021-05-17 at 09:32:41 UTC-0400 (Mon, 17 May 2021 09:32:41 -0400 (EDT)) > > Wietse Venema > > is rumored to have said: > > > > > Ivan Avery Frey: > > >> SASL when authenticating via PAM requires a service name. Is

Re: Posfix, SASL and PAM

Ivan Avery Frey: > On Mon., May 17, 2021, 09:33 Wietse Venema, wrote: > > > Ivan Avery Frey: > > > SASL when authenticating via PAM requires a service name. Is the > > > service name "stmp" hardcoded or is it configurable? > > > > That would be SASL configuration. not Postfix configuration. > >

Re: Posfix, SASL and PAM

On Mon., May 17, 2021, 09:33 Wietse Venema, wrote: > Ivan Avery Frey: > > SASL when authenticating via PAM requires a service name. Is the > > service name "stmp" hardcoded or is it configurable? > > That would be SASL configuration. not Postfix configuration. I'm sorry I didn't make my questio

Re: SASL and PAM

Bill Cole: > On 2021-05-17 at 09:32:41 UTC-0400 (Mon, 17 May 2021 09:32:41 -0400 (EDT)) > Wietse Venema > is rumored to have said: > > > Ivan Avery Frey: > >> SASL when authenticating via PAM requires a service name. Is the > >> service name "stmp" hardcoded or is it configurable? > > > > That wo

Re: incoming email SSL errors for only some domains.

On 29/4/21 10:44, P V Anthony wrote: On 27/4/2021 2:11 pm, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keywords    smtpd-ehlo-discard.cidr: # NetName:    MERCK1 #

Re: SASL and PAM

On 2021-05-17 at 09:32:41 UTC-0400 (Mon, 17 May 2021 09:32:41 -0400 (EDT)) Wietse Venema is rumored to have said: > Ivan Avery Frey: >> SASL when authenticating via PAM requires a service name. Is the >> service name "stmp" hardcoded or is it configurable? > > That would be SASL configuration. no

Re: SASL and PAM

Ivan Avery Frey: > SASL when authenticating via PAM requires a service name. Is the > service name "stmp" hardcoded or is it configurable? That would be SASL configuration. not Postfix configuration. Wietse

Re: Unwanted disclosure of email addresses

Am 17.05.21 um 14:17 schrieb Richard Damon: > On 5/17/21 8:00 AM, Magnus Harlander wrote: >> Hi, >> >> have you ever got an email containing lots of email addresses >> including your >> own in the TO or CC field or somewhere else in the mail body? >> >> I think, this happens for different reasons:

Re: Unwanted disclosure of email addresses

On 2021-05-17 at 08:00:30 UTC-0400 (Mon, 17 May 2021 14:00:30 +0200) Magnus Harlander is rumored to have said: Is this really a good idea? Not really. For mail which does not originate within the scope of your authority to set policy, you would be interfering with the intent of a sender who

Re: Unwanted disclosure of email addresses

On 5/17/21 8:00 AM, Magnus Harlander wrote: > Hi, > > have you ever got an email containing lots of email addresses > including your > own in the TO or CC field or somewhere else in the mail body? > > I think, this happens for different reasons: > > - people sending emails to many recipients don't

Unwanted disclosure of email addresses

Hi, have you ever got an email containing lots of email addresses including your own in the TO or CC field or somewhere else in the mail body? I think, this happens for different reasons: - people sending emails to many recipients don't know or don't care how to do that   properly - people dont'

Re: Message sent by SMTP get lost whereas those via pickup(sendmail) are OK

On 17/05/21 10:37 pm, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote: I would disagree that port 465 with TLS-wrapper around SMTP is better than port 587 with STARTTLS. It's only your personal opinion. Port 587 with mandatory STARTTLS is in no way less secure than TLS-wrapped port 465. I used to make that argument (see b

Re: Message sent by SMTP get lost whereas those via pickup(sendmail) are OK

Dnia 17.05.2021 o godz. 21:55:22 Peter pisze: > > Port 465 = submissions = best > Port 587 with mandatory starttls = submission = acceptable I would disagree that port 465 with TLS-wrapper around SMTP is better than port 587 with STARTTLS. It's only your personal opinion. Port 587 with mandatory

Re: Message sent by SMTP get lost whereas those via pickup(sendmail) are OK

On 17/05/21 9:12 pm, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote: Dnia 17.05.2021 o godz. 08:52:33 Chris Green pisze: Most mail clients will use sendmail rather than SMTP on port 25 (or another port) won't they? As I said my postfix works fine for sending E-Mails from my MUA (mutt) which uses sendmail. Most *desktop

Re: Message sent by SMTP get lost whereas those via pickup(sendmail) are OK

Dnia 17.05.2021 o godz. 08:52:33 Chris Green pisze: > > > > Ubuntu desktop should have Thunderbird preinstalled. Why not just try to > > send mail using a regular mail client? > > Most mail clients will use sendmail rather than SMTP on port 25 (or > another port) won't they? As I said my postfix

Re: Message sent by SMTP get lost whereas those via pickup(sendmail) are OK

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 09:03:25AM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote: >It was not rejected by mail.gandi.net. > >If it was rejected by something beyond that, [1]ch...@zmbc.eu would get >a bounce notification (DSN). > >Postfix is not involved in any way. > OK, thanks. -- Chris Green

Re: Message sent by SMTP get lost whereas those via pickup(sendmail) are OK

On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 10:14:45PM +0200, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote: > Dnia 16.05.2021 o godz. 13:58:22 Bob Proulx pisze: > > Chris Green wrote: > > > I am trying to debug it by connecting directly to port 25 on localhost > > > using telnet and composing mail that way. > > > > I highly recommend "swaks"