When I send a message to someone else, in the headers for the received
message, you get the following:
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.11.10?) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]@70.240.235.119)
by 0 with ESMTPA; 22 Mar 2007 11:50:48 -
This header line contains the client machine's internal ip
Hi all,
I've already asked this but I couldn't find an answer yet. Sorry.
We've configured a toaster for several accounts with a very limited quota (3
MB). The problem I'm having is that when the user A tries to send a 5 MB
email to the user B, the email bounces (and includes a base64 encoded
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 07:55 -0500, Gary Bowling wrote:
When I send a message to someone else, in the headers for the received
message, you get the following:
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.11.10?) ([EMAIL
PROTECTED]@70.240.235.119)
by 0 with ESMTPA; 22 Mar 2007 11:50:48 -
Thank you very much Shane!
Just for the record, here's the message (download link doesn't work):
http://www.mail-archive.com/vchkpw@inter7.com/msg16503.html
And I can't believe I missed it in qmail.org:
http://www.qmail.org/www.jedi.claranet.fr/qmail-bounce.patch
Thanks again,
Mauro.
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 08:19 -0500, Gary Bowling wrote:
Seems a security risk because it shows both the internal address and
the external address of the client, not the server. Which gives a
hacker an easy way to start discovering outside/inside address pairs.
Finding who the user that sent
And I can't believe I missed it in qmail.org:
http://www.qmail.org/www.jedi.claranet.fr/qmail-bounce.patch
I belive I have had problems with bounces simply truncated at 50k or so.
I am not sure but I think qmail-scanner or clam used to judge weird things
when eg. an attachment was malformed due
Thanks for the attitude!, I didn't really need a lesson in NAT or
security. What I know about those things or how they are involved is not
of concern here..
I simply had a question of the possibility of removing those lines from
the header. I get email from other people using other MTA's
Thanks for the attitude!, I didn't really need a lesson in NAT or
security. What I know about those things or how they are involved is not
of concern here..
No need to get upset because... [read below]
I simply had a question of the possibility of removing those lines from
the header. I get
Thanks Maciej, Interesting, didn't realize this was a big topic in the
email community. It's also interesting that email from a friend who's
company uses MS Exchange doesn't have the info in the header.
Not that MS is very good at following the RFC's, but interesting.
I can understand that
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:14:50 -0500
Gary Bowling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not that MS is very good at following the RFC's, but interesting.
The MS-Server is behind the Firewall, isn't? do the ms-client
use SMTP-AUTH to send emails?
I can understand that the server header is of importance as
On March 22 2007, 3:59 pm, ueli heuer wrote:
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:14:50 -0500
Gary Bowling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can understand that the server header is of importance as well as the
email address of the client. But the internal/external address of the
client machine seems pretty
ueli heuer wrote:
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:14:50 -0500
Gary Bowling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not that MS is very good at following the RFC's, but interesting.
The MS-Server is behind the Firewall, isn't? do the ms-client
use SMTP-AUTH to send emails?
Don't know about the MS
Hello there
I am using courier IMAP and IMAP-SSL and I was wandering why
IMAP_MOVE_EXPUNGE_TO_TRASH=1 doesn't work when I connect via SSL. when I
delete a email on my inbox, it simple zaps the emails when it should
move it to the trash.
when I connect to the regular imapd, it works as
Daniel wrote:
Hello there
I am using courier IMAP and IMAP-SSL and I was wandering why
IMAP_MOVE_EXPUNGE_TO_TRASH=1 doesn't work when I connect via SSL. when I
delete a email on my inbox, it simple zaps the emails when it should
move it to the trash.
when I connect to the regular imapd,
ok
thanks for the quick response !
Daniel
Bill Shupp wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Hello there
I am using courier IMAP and IMAP-SSL and I was wandering why
IMAP_MOVE_EXPUNGE_TO_TRASH=1 doesn't work when I connect via SSL. when I
delete a email on my inbox, it simple zaps the emails when it should
All,
I've got a new toaster patch that I could use help testing:
http://shupp.org/patches/qmail-toaster-0.9.0rc2.patch.bz2
Below are the patches included. Please help test if you can. I have it
running on my personal system at the moment.
NOTE: This version supports DomainKeys, and requires
Hi,
I just set up a secondary MX for my domains, and it works of course.
But, what I wanted is that for both MXes to chkuser from mysql.
When sending mail through the first MX (it has mysql and the domain
maildirs) it can check if a user does not exist and say: no such user.
The other MX
On Mar 22, 2007, at 5:55 AM, Gary Bowling wrote:
When I send a message to someone else, in the headers for the
received message, you get the following:
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.11.10?)
([EMAIL PROTECTED]@70.240.235.119)
by 0 with ESMTPA; 22 Mar 2007 11:50:48 -
This
Hello list !
Well after figuring out that qmailctl cdb does not recompile tcp.smtp.cdb
and it does not activate simscan :)
I'm stuck in another step on using the new simscan 1.3.1...
I have activated debug logging and the issue is that simscan stops at
ripmime with the cryptic message : ripmime
Just to keep it documented : the problem was that I was using supervise
(daemontools) to startup and manage courier imap. and the scripts that I
was using weren't reading both imapd and imapd-ssl config files for the
imapd-ssl app... but I corrected that and all is fine now.
is there possible to have also remote smtp auth patch in you Toaster?
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 12:36 -0700, Bill Shupp wrote:
All,
I've got a new toaster patch that I could use help testing:
http://shupp.org/patches/qmail-toaster-0.9.0rc2.patch.bz2
Below are the patches included. Please
21 matches
Mail list logo
