Re: Is greylisting effective? (was Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold)

Am 29.07.2016 um 22:48 schrieb Dianne Skoll: On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 22:39:15 +0200 Robert Schetterer wrote: I don't use postfix or postscreen. hm.. that does not fit the subject..why did you involved yourself ? I am sorry. I should have changed the thread subject. you may

Is greylisting effective? (was Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold)

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 22:39:15 +0200 Robert Schetterer wrote: > > I don't use postfix or postscreen. > hm.. that does not fit the subject..why did you involved yourself ? I am sorry. I should have changed the thread subject. > you may get that quite better, i see > a lot of

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Robert, As I tried to point out you are at the end of a thread injecting new “life” into it, which isn’t benefitting the group discussion of an issue. Thank you, Ryan > On Jul 29, 2016, at 3:39 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote: > > Am 29.07.2016 um 22:22 schrieb Dianne Skoll: >> On

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 22:22 schrieb Dianne Skoll: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 22:21:04 +0200 > Robert Schetterer wrote: > >> now compare with pure postscreen > > I don't use postfix or postscreen. hm.. that does not fit the subject..why did you involved yourself ? All I'm showing is that

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 21:35 schrieb Ryan Coleman: > Apparently you missed the rest of the thread as it was bypassing the > scanning the SA would do. > > But you’re jumping in 11 days (and 42 messages) after the thread started. hopefully it will now come to an end now, it was less informative > >

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 22:21:04 +0200 Robert Schetterer wrote: > now compare with pure postscreen I don't use postfix or postscreen. All I'm showing is that greylisting stops a lot of mail, quite cheaply. And hardly anyone notices it. This is a production system filtering email

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 22:15 schrieb Dianne Skoll: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 21:13:56 +0200 > Robert Schetterer wrote: > >> so i.e measure mails tagged as spam by spamassassin >> with pure greylisting setup running before tagging ,perhaps for one >> week, then stop greylisting ,do the same

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 21:13:56 +0200 Robert Schetterer wrote: > so i.e measure mails tagged as spam by spamassassin > with pure greylisting setup running before tagging ,perhaps for one > week, then stop greylisting ,do the same with pure postscreen setup, > compare results, this way

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Apparently you missed the rest of the thread as it was bypassing the scanning the SA would do. But you’re jumping in 11 days (and 42 messages) after the thread started. > On Jul 29, 2016, at 1:28 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote: > > the subject Using Postfix and Postgrey - not

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 20:45 schrieb Dianne Skoll: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 20:36:51 +0200 > Robert Schetterer wrote: > >> Am 29.07.2016 um 20:07 schrieb Dianne Skoll: >>> I don't agree. Greylisting done properly is very effective and has >>> minimal impact. We have it on by default on

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 20:36:51 +0200 Robert Schetterer wrote: > Am 29.07.2016 um 20:07 schrieb Dianne Skoll: > > I don't agree. Greylisting done properly is very effective and has > > minimal impact. We have it on by default on our spam-filtering > > service and very few people

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 20:07 schrieb Dianne Skoll: > I don't agree. Greylisting done properly is very effective and has > minimal impact. We have it on by default on our spam-filtering > service and very few people have even noticed it. show evidence, dont speculate ,measure i ve done it over years,

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 20:06 schrieb John Hardin: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Reindl Harald wrote: > >> >> >> Am 29.07.2016 um 18:15 schrieb John Hardin: >>> On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> >>> > Am 29.07.2016 um 03:30 schrieb Ryan Coleman: >>> > > > On Jul 28, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Reindl

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

> On Jul 29, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 29.07.2016 um 19:26 schrieb Shawn Bakhtiar: >> >>> On Jul 29, 2016, at 10:12 AM, @lbutlr wrote: >>> >>> On 29 Jul 2016, at 09:20, sha...@shanew.net wrote: I would generalize that

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.07.2016 um 18:15 schrieb John Hardin: On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 29.07.2016 um 03:30 schrieb Ryan Coleman: > > > On Jul 28, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Reindl Harald > > > wrote: > > > > Am 28.07.2016

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Reindl Harald wrote: The reality is most of us (the other 99%) are not dedicated mail admins and hence that ones should listen was dedicated sysadmins spent thousands of hours in rock stable system are explaining ...which would be a lot easier to do if it didn't come

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 11:12:55 -0600 "@lbutlr" wrote: > Greylisting is a great idea, in theory. In practice there are so many > large emailers who can’t do email properly that is causes more > trouble than it prevents. I don't agree. Greylisting done properly is very effective

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 18:34:30 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > what do you use? DCC? No, we have our own code. > >1) If our customer has whitelisted a sender, but the whitelisted > >sender is in the From: header and not the envelope, we want the > >ability to skip

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 19:26 schrieb Shawn Bakhtiar: On Jul 29, 2016, at 10:12 AM, @lbutlr wrote: On 29 Jul 2016, at 09:20, sha...@shanew.net wrote: I would generalize that even more to say that greylisting should come before any other content-based filtering (virus scanners,

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 19:12 schrieb @lbutlr: On 29 Jul 2016, at 09:20, sha...@shanew.net wrote: I would generalize that even more to say that greylisting should come before any other content-based filtering (virus scanners, defanging, etc.). Greylisting is a great idea, in theory. In practice

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

> On Jul 29, 2016, at 10:12 AM, @lbutlr wrote: > > On 29 Jul 2016, at 09:20, sha...@shanew.net wrote: >> I would generalize that even more to say that greylisting should come >> before any other content-based filtering (virus scanners, defanging, >> etc.). > > Greylisting is

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On 29 Jul 2016, at 09:20, sha...@shanew.net wrote: > I would generalize that even more to say that greylisting should come > before any other content-based filtering (virus scanners, defanging, > etc.). Greylisting is a great idea, in theory. In practice there are so many large emailers who

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 18:15 schrieb John Hardin: On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.07.2016 um 03:30 schrieb Ryan Coleman: > On Jul 28, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Reindl Harald > wrote: > > Am 28.07.2016 um 21:36 schrieb Ryan Coleman: > > I have eliminated

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Greylisting was the hangup. For whatever reason other settings changes were being ignored as long as postgrey was in the mix. I removed postgrey and the RBSL configuration I did a few months ago finally started to work. So there was likely something else at play but regardless - I removed

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 08:35:46 -0700 (PDT) John Hardin wrote: Greylisting means *you don't see the content at all during the delay*. You tell the sending MTA to try again later when they first connect and send the MAIL FROM and RCPT TO. If you implement the delay *after*

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016, Ryan Coleman wrote: Doesn’t matter. I killed it. It’s gone. I have eliminated postgrey from the installation and things are back to “normal” On 29.07.16 10:20, sha...@shanew.net wrote: On the off chance that your decision to turn off greylisting was related to Matus

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Dianne Skoll wrote: On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 08:35:46 -0700 (PDT) John Hardin wrote: Greylisting means *you don't see the content at all during the delay*. You tell the sending MTA to try again later when they first connect and send the MAIL FROM and RCPT

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.07.2016 um 03:30 schrieb Ryan Coleman: > On Jul 28, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Reindl Harald > wrote: > > Am 28.07.2016 um 21:36 schrieb Ryan Coleman: > > I have eliminated postgrey from the installation and things are back

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 08:35:46 -0700 (PDT) John Hardin wrote: > Greylisting means *you don't see the content at all during the > delay*. You tell the sending MTA to try again later when they first > connect and send the MAIL FROM and RCPT TO. If you implement the > delay

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, sha...@shanew.net wrote: On the off chance that your decision to turn off greylisting was related to Matus Uhlar's message that concludes with: "if you run SA, there's no point in running greylisting anymore." That could be interpreted to read "if you run SA at all,

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

On the off chance that your decision to turn off greylisting was related to Matus Uhlar's message that concludes with: "if you run SA, there's no point in running greylisting anymore." That could be interpreted to read "if you run SA at all, there's no need for greylisting at all", but I don't

Re: Using Postfix and Postgrey - not scanning after hold

Am 29.07.2016 um 03:30 schrieb Ryan Coleman: No, asshole. I fixed it by removing postgrey from the equation. asshole? just look in your mirror! On Jul 28, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 28.07.2016 um 21:36 schrieb Ryan Coleman: Doesn’t matter. I killed