I don't understand what's going on here, but somehow all of a sudden
I am on the spamcop RBL. If I tail /var/log/qmail/smtp/current, I'm
seeing a TON of emails getting relayed that are all .ru hosts and
addresses.
I've run every open relay test I could find and all of them
say I'm good to go,
Looks to me like both accounts are being used, from the same IP address.
You could also add the IP address to the /etc/spamdyke/blacklist_ip file
(provided you've installed spamdyke, which you should do if you haven't).
On 04/03/2014 10:09 AM, Sebastian Grewe wrote:
Auth line is:
qmailadmin allows users to change minimal settings for their account,
such as password and vacation messages.
Not a dumb question. It was a few years before I realized that accounts
other than postmaster could use qmailadmin.
(Ok, so maybe it's still dumb ;) )
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On
Pump!
From: Natalio Gatti
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 3:03 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
Here we (I) go.
You have two options to change your outbound IP address via iptables in the
same box where QMT
@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
Here we (I) go.
You have two options to change your outbound IP address via iptables in the
same box where QMT is running.
1) using src-nat and cron
2) using src-nat and NTH option
Option 1)
Simple iptables rule
Hi all.
Any news about this?
From: Alberto López Navarro | HazteOir.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 4:36 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
I think the bottleneck must be somewhere else. I'm administering
*Subject:* Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
I think the bottleneck must be somewhere else. I'm administering a qmail
based mass e-mail system, and we're sending a bulletin to 250.000 members,
which takes 6-7 hours, with a single server (a run-of-the-mill Dell PE850).
I
: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
I think the bottleneck must be somewhere else. I'm administering a qmail based
mass e-mail system, and we're sending a bulletin to 250.000 members, which
takes 6-7 hours, with a single server (a run-of-the-mill Dell PE850). I first
had
, real boxes
working.
Regards.
-Mensaje original-
From: Eric Shubert
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 8:14 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
Sounds like you've taken great measures to prevent unauthorized use.
I
as well.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
Regards.
-Mensaje original- From: Eric Shubert
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 8:14 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
Sounds like you've taken great measures to prevent unauthorized use
: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 8:14 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@**qmailtoaster.comqmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
Sounds like you've taken great measures to prevent unauthorized use.
I still think that 350 per account is high though
please any answer or contributions
regarding this thread I would really appreciate that would be focus to this.
Regards.
From: Délsio Cabá
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 10:51 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
Hi all
: Monday, May 21, 2012 6:14 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
On 05/21/2012 03:06 PM, fmende...@terra.com wrote:
Hello Eric, thanks for your reply.
We do not have spam issues with our customers, what we have is a high
to this.
Regards.
-Mensaje original- From: Eric Shubert
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 6:14 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
On 05/21/2012 03:06 PM, fmende...@terra.com wrote:
Hello Eric, thanks for your reply.
We do not have
I don't know if rotating addresses is the best solution or not. It's
certainly not practical for small QMT installations.
I think in many (if not all or most) of these cases, the user's password
has been compromised. This is especially likely if it's possible to
configure a client insecurely
Fusion Web Developer
LAMP stack expert.
From: Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 3:55 PM
Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help request to comunity on tech issue.
I don't know if rotating addresses
Hello Eric, thanks for your reply.
We do not have spam issues with our customers, what we have is a high
volume due to large clients number.
All meassures to void spam sending are taken, but the blocks are
being generated for large volume send from just a bunch of IPs (5)
which are the number
Have you tried a DNS round robin solution?
On 05/21/2012 03:06 PM, fmende...@terra.com wrote:
Hello
Eric, thanks for your reply.
We do not have spam issues with our customers, what we have is a
high volume due to large clients number.
I was going to write that RR would be of no help, then it dawned on me.
You could set up a single submission server, then smtproute all outbound
messages from it to a DNS round robin set of sending agent machines.
Virtual machines would work nicely for this.
Goes to show, there's more than
On 05/21/2012 03:06 PM, fmende...@terra.com wrote:
Hello Eric, thanks for your reply.
We do not have spam issues with our customers, what we have is a high
volume due to large clients number.
With so many clients, the probability of compromised passwords is fairly
high. I wouldn't be very
Hi all,
I am also a small ISP but I don't have such problems and I don't use a
cluster yet.
The easiest solution is normall the best one.
If you have a Storage try to implement a Load Balance with multiple mail
servers instead of a cluster.
This way you will be able to answer smtp/pop3 requests
On 03/22/2012 11:01 AM, Ronnie Tartar wrote:
Update, seems like I had an email account that was full and no longer being
used by the company, they found some back scatter mail in the queue with an
email box that was full. Is there any type of parameter that I can set to
limit this type of
@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help with bad reputation
On 03/22/2012 11:01 AM, Ronnie Tartar wrote:
Update, seems like I had an email account that was full and no longer
being used by the company, they found some back scatter mail in the
queue with an email box that was full. Is there any
that I can run to see how full different email boxes are?
-Original Message-
From: Eric Shubert [mailto:e...@shubes.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 2:13 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help with bad reputation
On 03/22/2012 11:01 AM, Ronnie
On 11/23/2011 05:22 AM, Andre Ribeiro wrote:
When is created a new domain with the following command:
/home/vpopmail/bin/vadddomain, all domains are created with umask 077.
Is possible to create new domains directory with umask 007?
Att,
Andre
You could write a wrapper script to do this.
at the time they're created.
-Mensagem original-
De: Eric Shubert [mailto:e...@shubes.net]
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 23 de novembro de 2011 14:14
Para: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Assunto: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help umask
On 11/23/2011 05:22 AM, Andre Ribeiro wrote:
When is created a new
Let me guess (since you haven't provided much information to go on).
You used vqadmin to create the domain.
Right or wrong?
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 03/04/2011 05:05 AM, I.Y. Andi Aji Kristian wrote:
Hello, my qmailtoaster can send but can`t received anything.
i got error :
Yes, i create domain with vqmail, but i create user with qcontrol
-Pesan Asli-
Dari: Eric Shubert
Terkirim: 04/03/2011 8:54:42 PM
Subjek: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help me, my qmail can send but cant receive
anything, urgent
Let me guess (since you haven't provided much information to go
...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 6:03 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
mailto:qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: help -- smtp forward--
gracias,, al fin alguien español
2011/2
On 02/25/2011 09:18 AM, Ariel wrote:
List, I need your help urgently.
Tenqo qmail running on a single domain, but I need all outgoing mail
from that domain, it can be sent by another server.
since I'm tieneindo blacklisting problems.
if one can not rule need to forward all outgoing mail to
Ariel, armando una ruta en smtproutes soluciona tu problema
2011/2/25 Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net
On 02/25/2011 09:18 AM, Ariel wrote:
List, I need your help urgently.
Tenqo qmail running on a single domain, but I need all outgoing mail
from that domain, it can be sent by another server.
gracias,, al fin alguien español
2011/2/25 Carlos Herrera Polo carlos.herrerap...@gmail.com
Ariel, armando una ruta en smtproutes soluciona tu problema
2011/2/25 Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net
On 02/25/2011 09:18 AM, Ariel wrote:
List, I need your help urgently.
Tenqo qmail running on a
.
From: Ariel [mailto:lauchafernan...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 6:03 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: help -- smtp forward--
gracias,, al fin alguien español
2011/2/25 Carlos Herrera Polo carlos.herrerap...@gmail.com
Ariel, armando
Hey Andi,
Welcome to the community.
QMT contains eMPF, which does this sort of thing. See
http://www.qmailwiki.org/EMPF for reference.
I don't know about restriction classes, so I would look at this aspect
in detail. If you have eMPF specific questions, you might ask them on
the eMPF
David Milholen wrote:
The blacklist_rdns would be the place to list my domain?
--Dave
-
No, that wouldn't be effective, as the spammers aren't using your rdns.
Put
@mydomain.com
in the
If all of your submissions come from authenticated connections (which
they should), you can blacklist your own domain. I know this sounds
counter-intuitive, but since all of your domains authenticate, the only
rejections will be those who claim to come from your domain but fail to
On 7/12/2010 8:28 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
If all of your submissions come from authenticated connections (which
they should), you can blacklist your own domain. I know this sounds
counter-intuitive, but since all of your domains authenticate, the
only rejections will be those who claim to
I was able to get rid of that sort of spam by signing all outgoing mail with
Domainkeys and setting the policy record for Domainkeys to signify: This server
signs ALL outgoing mail.
Incoming policy can be adjusted to reject mail where there is no signature in
such a case.
Martin
Am
Looks like it happens both on i386 and 64bit centos.
Best wishes,
Edwin
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Jake Vickers j...@qmailtoaster.com wrote:
On 06/06/2010 01:12 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Hey Jake, this looks like a bug in the qmail-toaster.spec file. I'd
suggest that Eli file a bug
I just installed QMT ISO CentOS 5.x i386 under VMWare Server 2 and I
got the correct tcp.smtp config file:
[r...@mx tcprules.d]# cat tcp.smtp
127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=,DKSIGN=/var/qmail/control/domainkeys/%/private,RBLSMTPD=,NOP0FCHECK=1
Here's my first test virtual machine.
I used a host machine CentOS 5.3 i386 with 4GB or memory on an Intel Q9400
I installed the latest OpenVZ virtualization platform.
I used a Virtual Machine Centos 5.5 i386 template and gave it 1GB RAM
and 10gb space.
I installed qmailtoaster and I got the
Hey Jake, this looks like a bug in the qmail-toaster.spec file. I'd
suggest that Eli file a bug report, but Mantis isn't up yet. I can have
a look at the spec file myself, but I don't have a 64-bit test host (yet
- probably will soon).
How do you want to handle this? (How's mantis coming
On 06/06/2010 01:12 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Hey Jake, this looks like a bug in the qmail-toaster.spec file. I'd
suggest that Eli file a bug report, but Mantis isn't up yet. I can
have a look at the spec file myself, but I don't have a 64-bit test
host (yet - probably will soon).
How do you
I had the same problem, and others on the list helped me correct the
problem last week. I'm running CentOS also, but had installed in
December last year.
On 5/29/2010 7:23 AM, Eli Edwin Casimero wrote:
Super Thank You!
This line in /etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp
With the missing QMAILQUE was the
Return Receipt
Your Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Help. Spamassassin not working in
document: CentOS 5.4 and 5.5 x86_64
I'm wondering if perhaps this is a problem that's specific to x86_64
hosts. I wouldn't have guessed that, but who knows? I believe that Eli
was going to attempt to recreate the problem.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
Tom Keyser wrote:
I had the same problem, and others on the list helped me correct the
Super Thank You!
This line in /etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp
With the missing QMAILQUE was the culprit.
How I got that I will have to make a few test installations.
This problem is solved.
Replication, later.
-
The 2nd line should look like this:
It looks as though spamd is running, but simscan isn't getting the messages.
Are you seeing simscan messages in the smtp log? Like:
05-28 08:34:15 simscan:[3519]:CLEAN (0.10/8.00):5.2445s:...
Please post the contents of:
/etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp
/var/qmail/control/simcontrol
Please post the
Tried this now:
1. zero / none / no simscan in all the log files archived or current
of /var/log/qmail/smtp
2. /etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp
127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=,DKSIGN=/var/qmail/control/domainkeys/%/private
Tried this now:
1. zero / none / no simscan in all the log files archived or current
of /var/log/qmail/smtp
2. /etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp
127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=,DKSIGN=/var/qmail/control/domainkeys/%/private
Eli Edwin Casimero wrote:
Tried this now:
1. zero / none / no simscan in all the log files archived or current
of /var/log/qmail/smtp
2. /etc/tcprules.d/tcp.smtp
127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=,DKSIGN=/var/qmail/control/domainkeys/%/private
Do you have any idea how you ended up with no QMAILQUEUE variable? This is
not the first time that has happened to someone recently.
My current theory is that all these installations have in common is
that they are CentOS 5.4 x86_64 XEN installations hosted in CentOS 5.4
x86_64 XEN. Maybe XEN
Nothing appears to be wrong, but you've modified the address, which
makes it difficult if not impossible to tell. :(
Have you referred to the chkuser documentation?
http://www.interazioni.it/opensource/chkuser/documentation/
Rajesh M wrote:
hi
one of my clients recd this error saying that
No need to reinstall. Simply:
# cd /var/qmail/bin
# ln -sf qmail-queue.orig qmail-queue
This takes qmail-dk out of the picture entirely, and any DK settings you
have other places will be ineffective.
Might need to restart qmail afterwards - not sure on that.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
Amit wrote:
Hi
Amit wrote:
Hi Everyone,
One of my user is getting bounced message with below error:
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
Hi Eric,
That QMT server contains 3 domains. And among this 3 domains its only giving
error to 1 domain. For time being I had removed
DKIMSIGN=/var/qmail/control/domainkeys/%/private to DKIMSIGN;.
Regards,
Amit
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Eric Shubert e...@shubes.net wrote:
Amit wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I think my qmail-dk file got bug. Now it is giving error for all domains on
the QMT server. Do I need to reinstall qmail?
Regards,
Amit
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Amit a...@ikf.co.in wrote:
Hi Eric,
That QMT server contains 3 domains. And among this 3 domains its only
Ask in the list.
If you are getting a bounce when you send to the list, send me the
bounce and I will look into it.
For what it's worth, your mail did go through and someone already
posted a response.
Erik
On 3/12/07, manny mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi erik ,
Im trying to send
58 matches
Mail list logo
