I think I understand now. In your original message the message headers
show that your server is adding "(DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted)" to its
"Received:" line. That token is added by a patched qmail installation
when the remote server transmits the message using TLS.
Because the transmission
NOW is working!!!, on version 4, not 3, but this is not a trouble right now
And all was for memory limit
I never think in that!!!
Years don't come alone :D
THANKS SAM!
I will send some statics from our servers later (now, we have 6 MXs
working)
Debugin output for version 4
-
Some more log info:
# cat /var/log/maillog* |grep dotzero
Jul 15 01:26:42 virtuality spamd[30259]: spamd: processing message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for vpopmail:0
Jul 15 01:26:52 virtuality spamd[30259]: spamd: result: . 4 -
BAYES_99,HTML_MESSAGE,MIME_HTML_ONLY,RCVD_IN_ORDB
scantime=10.7,size=7980,u
If there are no log entries for those IP addresses, the messages must be
entering your server some other way. Your last message showed running
"grep" on the output from "tail"; have you run "grep" over your entire
maillog file?
You could try enabling the full logging option ("full-log-dir") to
So with spamdyke 4.0.0, no one is ever blocked for relaying and it
doesn't matter whether you use the "access-file" option?
I think the problem might be the memory limit. You're using "softlimit"
to set the maximum memory usage to 9 MB, which is pretty low. On my
server, for example, I use "s
Hello
I have the same probklem, but this time (with version 4), is worse
I'm sending my .conf, tcp.smtp, rcpthost & run (supervise smtp)
I will try to explain what I do.
I DON'T use smtp-auth because these servers are MTA, no SMTP for clients.
This servers "act" as OPEN RELAY, because there are
Sam,
I am not sure about this submission port. How can I tell it for sure?
I tried to connect using these ports and my box refused it:
#telnet 200.80.55.22 465
Trying 200.80.55.22...
telnet: connect to address 200.80.55.22: Connection refused
#telnet 200.80.55.22 587
Trying 200.80.55.22...
telnet:
If there are no log entries at all, several possibilities come to mind.
First, the connections may actually be coming from a different IP
address. That isn't likely but it's possible that the "Received:" line
is incorrect. Second, you might be looking at a bug in spamdyke. Third
and most li
I've been using spamdyke for almost a year now.
It rejects lots (LOTS!) of SPAM, but I cannot make it reject this specific
spammer.
There are no log entries for this sender
# tail /var/log/maillog |grep dotzero
# tail /var/log/maillog |grep 200.123.189.81
# tail /var/log/ma
Very strange. Is spamdyke printing any errors into the logs? Do
spamdyke's normal log messages show the IP addresses for these messages
that match the entries in your blacklist file?
You might also try running the "config-test" feature to see if there are
any problems with your configuration
You shouldn't need to create a new graylist folder for version 4.0.0.
The directory structure has changed but spamdyke will automatically
convert the old entries to the new format as they are used.
-- Sam Clippinger
Arne Metzger wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> great new version - congratulations!! And th
The first version 4 bug! Fantastic! :)
spamdyke 3.x uses a file named "_none" to graylist connections that
don't provide a sender address (bounce messages are typically delivered
this way).
spamdyke 4.0.0 changes the layout of the graylist directory structure by
creating folders for the sende
List,
About once a get we get a lot of spam messages like the one I attach its headers
here (3)
I tried to block those Ips, see (2), but it still gets through.
Any ideas why?
I might end up adding that domain in the sender-blacklist, but I wonder why it's
not blocked by the ip-blacklist.
Thanks for
Hi Sam,
great new version - congratulations!! And thank you very much for that work!
I had one issue when upgrading from 3.1.8 regarding graylisting:
the Format of the graylisting-directory has changed
3.1.8:
graylisting/my_domain/my_recipient/[EMAIL PROTECTED] which are
textfiles containing i
David Stiller schrieb:
> I agree. Great work!
>
> One thing i just noticed: Spamdyke gave me an error writing to the
> greylist. To a folder and file called "_none". Maybe it's a config-
> issue?
>
> It tried to write to my graylist like this:
>
> /var/qmail/spamdyke/greylist-dir//_none/_none
>
>
I agree. Great work!
One thing i just noticed: Spamdyke gave me an error writing to the
greylist. To a folder and file called "_none". Maybe it's a config-
issue?
It tried to write to my graylist like this:
/var/qmail/spamdyke/greylist-dir//_none/_none
Maybe it was an exception, but where did
16 matches
Mail list logo
