*yaawwnnn*
Christopher Chan wrote:
Quey wrote:
ed wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:53:31 +1000
Quey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P.S. does 'wizzard' work on your sendmail?
whats wizzard? I've heard of it, but I've heard of several things
called wizzrd, each to
ed wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:53:31 +1000
Quey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P.S. does 'wizzard' work on your sendmail?
whats wizzard? I've heard of it, but I've heard of several things
called wizzrd, each to their own.
It's a shell exploit for sendmail. Some versions of
Christopher Chan wrote:
Quey wrote:
ed wrote:
I think you should off load the processing work. Look into running a
remote clamd/spamassing, or setup multiple mail hubs jms has a guide on
that at http://qmail.jms1.net
I agree he needs to offload, but the jms1 way seems very cumbersome.
We
All that is needed is identical assign, rcpthosts and virtualdomains
files for mail delivery and acceptance. Patched qmails may or may not
need a bit more.
I am retracting this comment if the setup is for one qmail instance to
pass the mail to another qmail instance instead of both
Both qmail-smtpd instances can share the tcp.smtp.cdb file without
trouble. Now that you actually brought up routing...I see that I have
made a mistake. You must do your scanning with the /var/qmail instance
or which ever vpopmail does it changes on. The other qmail instance must
be the one
OK then so I could have a box in wich I do...
take qmail sources and patch them with johns (great and nice) patch...
make setup check and ./config-fast fqdn
after this
after this
change /var/qmail for /var/qmail-scanning-server in conf-local... and again
./config-fast fqdn
after this setup
On Friday 09 November 2007 04:52:16 am [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK then so I could have a box in wich I do...
take qmail sources and patch them with johns (great and nice) patch...
make setup check and ./config-fast fqdn
after this
after this
change /var/qmail for
Hi,
I'm gonna setup a qmail mailserver for mailscanning for a huge site... I
have think that setting a qmail with qmail-scanner for real time scanning
could be too slow because perhaps could arrive there... don't know 300
simultaneos mails.. so I think that could be better to setup a
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 15:47:53 +0100 (CET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks a lot Ed! here it sais how to setup a mail system in wich you
can have one scanning machine and a mailbox server.. this is what I'm
trying to do... but this won't be very helpful for me in this time
because the mailbox
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 14:01:07 +0100 (CET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm gonna setup a qmail mailserver for mailscanning for a huge
site... I have think that setting a qmail with qmail-scanner for real
time scanning could be too slow because perhaps could arrive there...
don't know 300
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 14:01:07 +0100 (CET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm gonna setup a qmail mailserver for mailscanning for a huge
site... I have think that setting a qmail with qmail-scanner for real
time scanning could be too slow because perhaps could arrive there...
don't know 300
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 14:01:07 +0100 (CET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm gonna setup a qmail mailserver for mailscanning for a huge
site... I have think that setting a qmail with qmail-scanner for real
time scanning could be too slow because perhaps could arrive there...
don't know 300
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 08:52:57 -0600
Rick Romero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not entirely, If the main issue is timeouts during SMTP, he can move
his scanning to '127.0.0.1', and remove it from his external IP. That
will ensure he can receive an email from the outside in its entirety.
He can
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 14:47 +, ed wrote:
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 15:47:53 +0100 (CET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks a lot Ed! here it sais how to setup a mail system in wich you
can have one scanning machine and a mailbox server.. this is what I'm
trying to do... but this won't be very
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 17:20 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 08:52:57 -0600
Rick Romero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not entirely, If the main issue is timeouts during SMTP, he can move
his scanning to '127.0.0.1', and remove it from his external IP. That
will ensure
Rick Romero ha scritto:
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 17:20 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 08:52:57 -0600
Rick Romero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not entirely, If the main issue is timeouts during SMTP, he can move
his scanning to '127.0.0.1', and remove it from his
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 18:50 +0100, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote:
Rick Romero ha scritto:
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 17:20 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 08:52:57 -0600
Rick Romero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not entirely, If the main issue is
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Quey wrote:
We have sendmail boxes as front line, that do all the pre-connect
tests easily without adding in 35 patches like we have to make qmail
modern-ish and then anti virus/spam/phishing/etc tests, one important
factor is the milter smf-sav which asks the
ed wrote:
tests easily without adding in 35 patches like we have to make qmail
For clarity we must separate the jms projects from what you're stating
above. The 35 patches may be so if you get them one-by-one from the
qmail.org site, but that is not so with the jms project. jms has
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 08:19:54 +1000
Quey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ed wrote:
I think you should off load the processing work. Look into running a
remote clamd/spamassing, or setup multiple mail hubs jms has a
guide on that at http://qmail.jms1.net
I agree he needs to offload, but
ed wrote:
I think you should off load the processing work. Look into running a
remote clamd/spamassing, or setup multiple mail hubs jms has a guide on
that at http://qmail.jms1.net
I agree he needs to offload, but the jms1 way seems very cumbersome.
We have sendmail boxes as front line,
Quey wrote:
We have sendmail boxes as front line, that do all the pre-connect tests
easily without adding in 35 patches like we have to make qmail
modern-ish and then anti virus/spam/phishing/etc tests, one important
factor is the milter smf-sav which asks the database server (we call)
Quey wrote:
ed wrote:
I think you should off load the processing work. Look into running a
remote clamd/spamassing, or setup multiple mail hubs jms has a guide on
that at http://qmail.jms1.net
I agree he needs to offload, but the jms1 way seems very cumbersome.
We have sendmail boxes as
So I have think that I could compile qmail one time and copy to two
different locations for example /var/qmail and
/var/qmail-scanning-server... is this possible? and is this possible
without having two different vpopmails? two different databases for smtp
auth... (Internet qmail scanner will
24 matches
Mail list logo
