Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-25 Thread Patrick von der Hagen
Tony Finch wrote: [...] I'm still working on a way to do this - I'm sure it's not impossible, but I haven't had much success yet. Ideally, the Linux machine would do an LDAP query to the Exchange server, but unless you can help me figure out how to do it, then I guess I'll just remain a

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-23 Thread Matt Yackley
François Conil said: snip it's kinda easy with postfix : http://www-personal.umich.edu/~malth/gaptuning/postfix/ I strongly advise to run it manually instead of via cron, since if the exchange server sh*t itself, the exchange_recipients list will contains nothing and all mails will be

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread Tony Finch
Brian Leyton wrote: What it comes down to is that I have a Linux machine at the front-end, running MimeDefang, Spamassassin, etc., which passes everything it hasn't rejected on to an old Exchange Server. I can't turn off the bounce messages at the Exchange Server (for various stupid reasons

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread Shane Williams
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Rick Macdougall wrote: What I mean is servers that 250 OK an email message, then later on try to resend the message to a forged sender because ... user is over quota Now I'm confused. Are you saying that running sendmail with procmail as the LDA is a Bad Thing? As I

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread Rick Macdougall
Shane Williams wrote: On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Rick Macdougall wrote: What I mean is servers that 250 OK an email message, then later on try to resend the message to a forged sender because ... user is over quota Now I'm confused. Are you saying that running sendmail with procmail as the LDA

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread François Conil
Rick Macdougall a écrit : Brian Leyton wrote: Rick Macdougall wrote: My system would disagree with you for the last 3 days :) We've been under a constant bounce bombardment of bounced spams (from f*cking idiot admins who can't understand that you do not bounce after accepting, sorry for

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread Matt Kettler
Aaron Boyles wrote: Uh oh... I might be a guilty party here. What do you mean by bounce after accepting? With my own app, it receives the E-Mail, gets as far as the DATA command, does a quick overview of the E-Mail, and if it's considered spam, it returns a 550 - User Doesn't Exist instead

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread Jim Maul
Matt Kettler wrote: Aaron Boyles wrote: Uh oh... I might be a guilty party here. What do you mean by bounce after accepting? With my own app, it receives the E-Mail, gets as far as the DATA command, does a quick overview of the E-Mail, and if it's considered spam, it returns a 550 - User

RE: MIMEDefang downstream recipient validation (was: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?))

2005-12-22 Thread Matthew.van.Eerde
Damrose, Mark wrote: See http://mimedefang.org/kwiki/index.cgi?Exchange2Access for scripts that pull the entire user base from an Exchange server and format as a sendmail access.db. ... If you have more than 1000 users on your system, you'll get errors - you can either modify your exchange

RE: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread Bowie Bailey
Matt Kettler wrote: No.. bounce after accept means to not validate the recipient until after the whole SMTP session is done. ie: a server set up to queue and forward all mail for a domain to an internal server without any checks of the recipient at all. Later the internal server rejects

RE: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread Aaron Boyles
Message- From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 1:04 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: RE: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?) Matt Kettler wrote: No.. bounce after accept means to not validate

RE: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-22 Thread Brian Leyton
Roger Taranto wrote: How are your users authenticated for the MSFT software? Is it via a domain controller? AFAIK, Active Directory can be configured as an LDAP server, which might somehow solve your problem -- or at least give you LDAP access to your users. (I think you have to be

RE: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-21 Thread Aaron Boyles
Uh oh... I might be a guilty party here. What do you mean by bounce after accepting? With my own app, it receives the E-Mail, gets as far as the DATA command, does a quick overview of the E-Mail, and if it's considered spam, it returns a 550 - User Doesn't Exist instead of a 250 - Okay. Is that

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-21 Thread Rick Macdougall
Brian Leyton wrote: Rick Macdougall wrote: My system would disagree with you for the last 3 days :) We've been under a constant bounce bombardment of bounced spams (from f*cking idiot admins who can't understand that you do not bounce after accepting, sorry for the language) where the

Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-21 Thread Rick Macdougall
Aaron Boyles wrote: Uh oh... I might be a guilty party here. What do you mean by bounce after accepting? With my own app, it receives the E-Mail, gets as far as the DATA command, does a quick overview of the E-Mail, and if it's considered spam, it returns a 550 - User Doesn't Exist instead of

RE: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does tuxorama.com sound fa miliar to anyone?)

2005-12-21 Thread Damrose, Mark
Brian Leyton wrote: Rick Macdougall wrote: Don't get too mad, but I'm one of those f*cking idiot admins who is bouncing after acceptance. The reason isn't (just) because I'm a f*cking idiot admin, but because I use f*cking idiot software that Management hasn't seen fit to upgrade yet,