On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Sam Clippinger s...@silence.org wrote:
Invalid recipients are not rejected by qmail at all; qmail accepts
messages for any user and later bounces them if the recipient doesn't
exist. This makes qmail a prolific source of backscatter spam.
Even if qmail did
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Kulkarni Shantanu
djbw...@shantanukulkarni.org wrote:
* slamp slamp slack...@gmail.com [090306 08:41]:
can the option be disabled or say graylist-max-secs=never ? can
someone tell me why one should set a timeout for graylisting?
please see,
http
can the option be disabled or say graylist-max-secs=never ? can
someone tell me why one should set a timeout for graylisting?
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:48 AM, Felix Buenemann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 24.10.2008 22:45 Uhr, Felix Buenemann schrieb:
Here's what I'd prefer to see as output
format:
spamdyke-stats.pl v???
Total : 122154
Allowed: 19514 15.97%
Timeout: 141 0.12%
Denied : 102499
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 11:55 AM, slamp slamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:48 AM, Felix Buenemann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 24.10.2008 22:45 Uhr, Felix Buenemann schrieb:
Here's what I'd prefer to see as output
format:
spamdyke-stats.pl v???
Total : 122154
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:12 PM, slamp slamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 11:55 AM, slamp slamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:48 AM, Felix Buenemann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 24.10.2008 22:45 Uhr, Felix Buenemann schrieb:
Here's what I'd prefer
to remain calmer than CERT/CC did. :)
-- Sam Clippinger
slamp slamp wrote:
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Eric Shubert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Buenemann wrote:
Hi,
I agree with Arthur and Bgs in that SPF is a smarter thing to check,
because it can be done without checking headers
where can i get this script?
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Felix Buenemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 07.10.2008 20:41 Uhr, Arthur Girardi wrote:
Hi Felix,
Making use of the opportunity, I'd like to suggest you changing line
25 of your script where it reads:
if( m/spamdyke/ ){
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Eric Shubert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix Buenemann wrote:
Hi,
I agree with Arthur and Bgs in that SPF is a smarter thing to check,
because it can be done without checking headers and currently has a much
wider disribution base.
IMHO the only way to
the nameserver that is
running on the server, you should change your /etc/resolv.conf to list
nameserver 127.0.0.1. That should also fix spamdyke.
-- Sam Clippinger
slamp slamp wrote:
well isn't 0.0.0.0 in linux means all interfaces? i didn't just want
dnscache to listen to localhost which
library to parse /etc/resolv.conf and apparently the library ignores the
invalid 0.0.0.0 entry. Version 4.0.x parses /etc/resolv.conf itself and
it doesn't ignore that entry. I'll fix that in the next version though...
-- Sam Clippinger
slamp slamp wrote:
hmm, i wonder why v3.1.8 works fine
my run file:
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`id -u vpopmail`
NOFILESGID=`id -g vpopmail`
MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
BLACKLIST=`cat /var/qmail/control/blacklists`
SMTPD=/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
SPAMDYKE=/usr/bin/spamdyke
SPAMDYKE_CONF=/etc/mail/spamdyke.conf
with it.
-- Sam Clippinger
slamp slamp wrote:
Aug 2 01:14:37 mail spamdyke[13033]:
DEBUG(filter_rdns_missing()@filter.c:841): checking for missing rDNS;
rdns: (unknown)
Aug 2 01:14:37 mail spamdyke[13033]: FILTER_RDNS_MISSING ip: 24.56.130.93
Aug 2 01:14:37 mail spamdyke[13033]:
DEBUG
Aug 2 01:14:37 mail spamdyke[13033]:
DEBUG(filter_rdns_missing()@filter.c:841): checking for missing rDNS;
rdns: (unknown)
Aug 2 01:14:37 mail spamdyke[13033]: FILTER_RDNS_MISSING ip: 24.56.130.93
Aug 2 01:14:37 mail spamdyke[13033]:
DEBUG(filter_ip_whitelist()@filter.c:1120): searching IP
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:08 PM, slamp slamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
has anyone written anything for logwatch to parse the spamdyke logs? thanks,
Sent this awhile back and no one responded. I guess no one here is
using logwatch?
___
spamdyke-users
has anyone written anything for logwatch to parse the spamdyke logs? thanks,
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
I have a question. I have the line below in my config.
check-dnsrbl=zen.spamhaus.org
So spamdyke should check if the sender is listed correct? and it
should never need to pass the traffic to qmail?
My observation so far seems that spamdyke is not doing this and my
qmail install (qmailtoaster)
17 matches
Mail list logo
