Hi Ulrich,

Yes they were at 1st DENIED_GREYLISTING but message was send after period 
with same sender so these were allowed at end. Some zombies are smart in 
these days and can fool GRAYLISTING. I have GRAYLISTING in place too. 
These messages goes thru because sender and recipent are same and both are 
from our domain. I have last idea to block our domain as sender. SMTP 
server is only inbound SMTP server. SMPADYKE shall bounce all e-mails 
suspected with SPAM because sender can't be from our mail domain at all.

You finally gave me bright idea how I could stop SPAM where sender and 
recipents are same. Is in another therad. Because I can block our domain 
as sender...

Many thanks you are clever man!
Eduard


"Ulrich C. Manns" <[email protected]> wrote on 06.05.2009 09:00:33:

> Hi Eduard,
> 
> to add only a dot wasn?t my idea. I added
> .com 
> .net
> 
> to reject these RDNS if they contains a ip address.
> 
> Normally DENIED_GREYLISTING should reject your three examples. I 
> wonder why not?
> 
> Von: Eduard Svarc <[email protected]>
> Antworten an: <[email protected]>, spamdyke users <spamdyke-
> [email protected]>
> Datum: Wed, 6 May 2009 08:22:29 +0200
> An: spamdyke users <[email protected]>
> Betreff: Re: [spamdyke-users] Problem with DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS not 
> applied to all connections
> 
> 
> Thank you all, 
> 
> after last changes in /etc/spamdyke.d/ip-in-rdns-keyword-blacklist-fil
> e where I did add to keywords '.'. I'm surprised why this wouldn't 
> work without '.' in pattern. Now SPAMDYKE block all DNS names with 
> IP in name. Only one exception remain for case when IP is in DNS 
> name witten ala reverse address. I guess it is by design and 
> SPAMDYKE doesn't check possible reverse notation of IP and it 
> resulting into ALLOW. Here is example: 
> 
> May  6 05:29:52 fw spamdyke[23071]: ALLOWED from: [email protected] to: 
> [email protected] origin_ip: 91.122.235.164 origin_rdns: 
> ip-164-235-122-091.pools.atnet.ru auth: (unknown) 
> 
> I guess it could be future fueature for IP block in rDNS check. I 
> would suggest it because it is not that rare case. 
> As I do observing logs few days I did see a lot of ISP allocate 
> theirs DSL/ADSL lines and giving names with partial IP in name, here
> are few records: 
> 
> May  6 06:53:05 fw spamdyke[23725]: ALLOWED from: [email protected] to: 
> [email protected] origin_ip: 82.144.185.107 origin_rdns: 
> adsl-185-107.globonet.hu auth: (unknown) 
> May  6 06:19:47 fw spamdyke[23487]: ALLOWED from: @xxxxxx.cz to: 
> @xxxxxx.cz origin_ip: 124.109.52.214 origin_rdns: mbl-109-52-214.
> dsl.net.pk auth: (unknown) 
> May  6 07:29:49 fw spamdyke[24011]: ALLOWED from: [email protected] to: 
> [email protected] origin_ip: 88.100.218.39 origin_rdns: 39.218.
> broadband5.iol.cz auth: (unknown) 
> 
> I can't count these names as regular ones for SMPT server, because 
> group of IP addresses returning same name. Who run SMTP server in 
> all cases request, or at least should request, real DNS name not 
> provider default assigned for whole group of IP addresses. SPAMDYKE 
> should do partial check on IP match as well too. 
> 
> Eduard
> 
> [email protected] wrote on 04.05.2009 10:00:08:
> 
> > 
> > Dear Ulrich, 
> > 
> > I didn't. I had these keywords without '.' as you can see in thread 
> > where I have listed full content of my file: 
> > 
> > > > /etc/spamdyke.d/ip-in-rdns-keyword-blacklist-file 
> > > > 
> > > > contains: 
> > > > 
> > > > dsl 
> > > > com 
> > > > net 
> > > > broadband 
> > > > dynamic 
> > > > 
> > 
> > Adding it now will see result. 
> > 
> > Thank You 
> > Eduard 
> > 
> > "Ulrich C. Manns" <[email protected]> wrote on 04.05.2009 
09:30:45:
> > 
> > > Hi Eduard,
> > > 
> > > i only added .com and .net (with dot as prefix!). This rejects all 
> > > of the blabla.net spams. I found some DENIED_IP_IN_RDNS with zeros:
> > > 
> > > May  4 09:18:03 srv0 spamdyke[18967]: DENIED_IP_IN_RDNS from: 
> > > [email protected] to: [email protected] origin_ip: 74.251.
> > > 132.129 origin_rdns: adsl-074-251-132-129.sip.asm.bellsouth.net 
> > > auth: (unknown)
> > > May  4 09:18:03 srv0 spamdyke[18967]: DENIED_IP_IN_RDNS from: 
> > > [email protected] to: [email protected] origin_ip: 74.251.
> > > 132.129 origin_rdns: adsl-074-251-132-129.sip.asm.bellsouth.net 
> > > auth: (unknown)
> > > 
> > > You really added the dot?
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > Ulrich
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Von: Eduard Svarc <[email protected]>
> > > Antworten an: <[email protected]>
> > > Datum: Mon, 4 May 2009 09:02:09 +0200
> > > An: "Ulrich C. Manns" <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: <[email protected]>, spamdyke users 
<[email protected]>
> > > Betreff: Re: [spamdyke-users] Problem with DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS not 
> > > applied to all connections
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Dear Ulrich, 
> > > 
> > > yes I did. In most case works fine like this from .net domain: 
> > > 
> > > May  4 08:44:23 fw spamdyke[21491]: DENIED_IP_IN_RDNS from: 
> > [email protected]: 
> > > [email protected] origin_ip: 71.115.109.232 origin_rdns: 
> > > pool-71-115-109-232.sangtx.dsl-w.verizon.net auth: (unknown) 
> > > 
> > > What else I found lines where numbers are prepended with '0' (zeros 
> > > and seems SPAMDYKE was fooled too. Here is example: 
> > > 
> > > May  4 08:45:15 fw spamdyke[21525]: ALLOWED from: [email protected] to: 

> > > [email protected] origin_ip: 65.184.96.160 origin_rdns: 
> > > cpe-065-184-096-160.sc.res.rr.com auth: (unknown) 
> > > 
> > > I have onother idea even I have defined 
> > > 
> > > ip-in-rdns-keyword-blacklist-file=/etc/spamdyke.d/ip-in-rdns-
> > > keyword-blacklist-file 
> > > 
> > > and keywords inside it stops only these lines where is keyword at 
> > > front of IP-part in DNS  not at end of IP-part DNS. 
> > > 
> > > I think that .net was stoped because I have in file keyword 'pool' 
> > > not because is there keyword 'net'. Why I think it is that case? 
> > > because I see lines like 
> > > 
> > > May  4 08:50:09 fw spamdyke[21599]: ALLOWED from: @xxxxxxx.cz to: 
> > > @xxxxxx.cz origin_ip: 79.180.128.135 origin_rdns: 
> > > bzq-79-180-128-135.red.bezeqint.net auth: (unknown) 
> > > 
> > > and it is from .net domain and even keyword 'net' is in blacklist 
> > > file mail wasn't denied at all. 
> > > 
> > > FYI: Why I do fight with these dynamic IP senders so hard? Reason is
> > > we getting around 10 to 20 connections from these each minute and I 
> > > don't want to waste bandwitdh at our line. We have SPAMDYKE at 
> > > perimeter SMTP to intercept these boggies. At backden we have true 
> > > mail server with SPAM prevention software. I'm trying this way to 
> > > offload some load from that server. We were in situation when we got
> > > around 10mil e-mail per day. This is for small company with 30 e-
> > > mail boxes really too much. It lead on DoS attack on our server. 
> > > Thanks to SPAMDYKE we did lower load by 99%. Now I'm trying to 
> > > intercept remaining boggies. 
> > > 
> > > Thank you 
> > > Eduard 
> > > 
> > > "Ulrich C. Manns" <[email protected]> wrote on 04.05.2009 
08:42:28:
> > > 
> > > > Did you find any DENIED_IP_IN_RDNS?
> > > > How are the file rights?
> > > > I have entered .com and .net, not only com and net.
> > > > 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Ulrich
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Von: Eduard Svarc <[email protected]>
> > > > Antworten an: <[email protected]>, spamdyke users <spamdyke-
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > Datum: Mon, 4 May 2009 08:32:35 +0200
> > > > An: spamdyke users <[email protected]>
> > > > Betreff: Re: [spamdyke-users] Problem with DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS 
not 
> > > > applied to all connections
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Dears, 
> > > > 
> > > > I did try to block incoming mails from dynamic IPs but with 
partial 
> > > > success still having problem with: 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > May  4 08:19:31 fw spamdyke[21023]: DENIED_GRAYLISTED from: 
> > > > [email protected] to: [email protected] origin_ip: 200.83.
> > > > 179.199 origin_rdns: pc-199-179-83-200.cm.vtr.net auth: (unknown) 
> > > > 
> > > > my \etc\spamdyke.conf contains next lines: 
> > > > 
> > > > reject-empty-rdns 
> > > > reject-ip-in-cc-rdns 
> > > > ip-in-rdns-keyword-blacklist-file=/etc/spamdyke.d/ip-in-rdns-
> > > > keyword-blacklist-file 
> > > > reject-missing-sender-mx 
> > > > reject-unresolvable-rdns 
> > > > 
> > > > and file: 
> > > > 
> > > > /etc/spamdyke.d/ip-in-rdns-keyword-blacklist-file 
> > > > 
> > > > contains: 
> > > > 
> > > > dsl 
> > > > com 
> > > > net 
> > > > broadband 
> > > > dynamic 
> > > > 
> > > > In most cases it does stop e-mails from DSL line subscribers but 
not
> > > > from all as you see from line above. Sender was just graylisted 
not 
> > > > denied with DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS. May be problem is wih IP in DNS 
> > > > because is exact reverse of real IP 200.83.179.199. In DNS is 
> > > > 199-177-83-200? Should SPAMDYKE check for ala-reverse IP? 
> > > > 
> > > > Any idea where I did mistake? 
> > > > 
> > > > Tanks in advance 
> > > > Eduard 
> > > > 
> > > > [email protected] wrote on 29.04.2009 12:46:53:
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Dear Sam, 
> > > > > 
> > > > > thank you for great hint. In first gues I tought root cause of 
> > > > > problem is IP represented in DNS because it is not plain IP but 
> > > > > dashes with leading text are used in name. I have similar 
entries 
> > > > inlog like:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Apr 29 12:34:52 fw spamdyke[11641]: ALLOWED from: 
xx...@xxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > to: xxx...@xxxxxx origin_ip: 88.12.245.122 origin_rdns: 122.
> > > > > red-88-12-245.dynamicip.rima-tde.net auth: (unknown) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Going to get test, crossing my fingers 
> > > > > Thank You 
> > > > > Eduard 
> > > > > 
> > > > > [email protected] wrote on 29.04.2009 
03:17:27:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > You've misunderstood the meaning of the 
> > "DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS"message. 
> > > > > > That particular filter is triggered because spamdyke found the 
IP 
> > > > > > address _and_ a two-letter country code.  In other words, 
> > your example 
> > > > > > was blocked because it contained the IP address and ended in 
> > > ".nl".  The 
> > > > > > graylisted entry wasn't blocked because it ends in ".net".
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > spamdyke searches for many different ways of putting the IP 
> > address in 
> > > > > > the rDNS name, including reversing the octets.  The full list 
of 
> > > > > > patterns it checks is listed here:
> > > > > >     http://www.spamdyke.org/documentation/README.html#RDNS
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > To block dynamic hosts, enable the "ip-in-rdns-keyword-
> > blacklist-file" 
> > > > > > option.  In the file, list a few keywords that you expect 
> to find in 
> > > > > > dynamic rDNS names (e.g. dhcp, dynamic, cable).  When 
> > spamdykefinds the 
> > > > > > IP address and one of those keywords, it will block the 
> connection. 
> > > > > > Using your example, if your keyword file contained "dsl", 
> > > spamdyke would 
> > > > > > have blocked the connection.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > There are also several RBLs that claim to block dynamic IP 
> > > ranges, but I 
> > > > > > haven't had much success with them.  Matching keywords and 
> > IP addresses 
> > > > > > has been much more fruitful for me.  Your mileage may vary.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -- Sam Clippinger
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Eduard Svarc wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Looking for clues,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would like reject all e-mails from dynamic IPs but seems 
that 
> > > > > > > Spamdyke don't recognize all correctly like:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > DENIED_GRAYLISTED from: [email protected] to: 
> > > > > > > pavel_k...@xxxxxxxx origin_ip: 99.184.238.30 origin_rdns: 
> > > > > > > adsl-99-184-238-30.dsl.irvnca.sbcglobal.net auth:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > is graylisted instead denied like:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS from: [email protected] 
to: 
> > > > > > > sa...@xxxxxxx origin_ip: 91.184.0.35 origin_rdns: 
> > > > > > > 91-184-0-35.shared.hostnet.nl auth:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As I see only diference is in 1st case is IP adress entered 
as 
> > > > > > > reverse, but still is just plain IP. Seems that some 
> > providers trying 
> > > > > > > to create pseudo FQDNS for theirs dynamic IPs. Denying 
> > dynamic IPs is 
> > > > > > > great feature preventing 99% of spams, but seems it could 
> > befooled or 
> > > > > > > can be configured even further to intercept is?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please Help
> > > > > > > 
> > > 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > spamdyke-users mailing list
> > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > spamdyke-users mailing list
> > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > spamdyke-users mailing list
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
> > _______________________________________________
> > spamdyke-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
_______________________________________________
spamdyke-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Reply via email to