Sounds like your problems are elsewhere. I've never had to reconfirm my
subscription, never had any complaints about the help people here give -
out of their own good will - and I've ran multiple ASSP instances for
donkeys years now without any but minor concerns.
At least no one tied you
On 22/03/16 11:55, Giuseppe Maglie wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I receive spamming from internal domain users like my address because the
> domain is in whitelist: I removed my domain from whitelist but after some
> minutes it come back in whitelist.
>
> How I can block these mails ?
>
You need to tell assp
On 22/03/16 11:29, Thomas Eckardt wrote:
> Fine - as I told you, this was a very simple stupid mistake - I must
> have been somehow mentally deranged.
Hey - you don't have to be mentally deranged to work around here
But it sure helps ;) :p
Any suggestions on this ?
It seems to be a repeatable denial of service -
10 of these
2016-03-17 19:45:09 [Worker_2] Error: Worker_2 accept to client failed
IO::Socket::SSL=GLOB(0x7fe491215f20) (timeout: 5 s) : SSL wants a read first
results in
2016-03-17 19:45:27 [Main_Thread] Error: got at
On 18/03/16 08:22, Thomas Eckardt wrote:
>
> This is your problem! Run assp with root permission or use listeners above
> port 1024.
I thought running it as a non-root daemon was the right thing to do :)
I've changed it to run as root and will keep an eye on things. Will it
still do the 130
On 18/03/16 09:47, Thomas Eckardt wrote:
>> I thought running it as a non-root daemon was the right thing to do :)
> Do I use linux or you ? You should know the OS you use!
> creating listeners on port 1-1024 are resticted to root per default - so
> you have three option
>
> - use listeners above
Am getting frequent occasions where SSL connections stop working - it
seems to be associated with the following in the logs. After this
occurs SSL is no longer listening - regardless of the length of time
after this occurs. There's no mention of SSL in the logs after this
until a restart of
Forgive me for not knowing whether this can be done but I've not really
touched my ASSP installs in a while (aside from upgrading them).
I'm wondering if it is possible to do the following in ASSP today...
1) Redirect the SMTP destination based on sender or recipient (i.e.
deliver or copy all
the same
customer doesn't just use their own mail server but that's a whole other
story).
This wouldn't be possible using IP tables because the destination mail
server is dependent on the sender not the recipient - nothing specific
in the TCP data.
--
Andrew Porter
Tel: 07766 667788
in Ironport -
which is currently being looked into being replaced.
--
Andrew Porter
Tel: 07766 667788
www.plingit.co.uk
--
Got visibility?
Most devs has no idea what their production app looks like.
Find out how fast your
On 11/10/10 14:30, Mike O'Connor wrote:
The big guys use expensive software/hardware to protect there mail
servers from these issues, ASSP does not help with this use case (at
least all my reading and testing shows it does not) and I've not been
able to find anything open source to handle this
I always set my local domains up as lan.example.com, with nameserver
views to prevent anyone external ever knowing about the sub-domain.
--
The Palm PDK Hot Apps Program offers developers who use the
Plug-In Development
Greybear wrote:
I have a setup that contains an exchange 2003, an ASSP box in front of it
and a secondary mailserver at our ISP.
Unless you are going to expect significant lengthy down time I don't
bother with a secondary at all. All servers should be storing and
forwarding so any attempts
Alex Davidson wrote:
Time will tell if Postini is as good as ASSP - I suspect not - but bigger
picture for me was doing away with my mail system overhead, allowing me to
be more productive in other areas.
If your mail system is an overhead and taking time from you, you must be
doing
GrayHat wrote:
No issue; rsync is working w/o problems; just ensure to allow port
873/tcp outbound on your firewall; if that doesn't work either, then
you may have been banned; if so, wait at least one hour before
retrying to download the signatures and btw DO NOT schedule
the update too
Melvin wrote:
... BIG SNIP ...
Just when I was sure I'd finally found the perfect place to put my
skills to use. :) I regularly explain the realities of the computer
world to my users, whatever their level of expertise. Sometimes it
works, sometimes it doesn't, but it always makes for
Waseem Sindhu wrote:
What should i do to discard those Bayesian spam messages and why is
going through?
X-Assp-Bayes-Confidence: 0.0
baysConfidence = 0.001
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
What is the accepted method for invalid recipient handling? I assume to
prevent someone from using error checking to validate local users, there
must be something better then returning a 5xx error code?
Anyone brute forcing like that would have been penalty blocked
Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
Only if they brute-force is fast succession - which is insanely dumb to
do. And this is were automation can be brilliant. There are lots of IP
addresses to scan. There is no need to make all your efforts against a
single IP at a time. If you revolve them, you
Joseph L. Casale wrote:
So how does one handle this scenario?
I am hoping to prevent the barrage of bogus emails from ever getting to my
destination server. How does one send all email not destined to a maintained
list silently to /dev/null :)
You don't - you reject it like you are
Chris Smith wrote:
The cron entry is:
# Rebuild the ASSP spam database at 03:00 every day
#
0 3 * * * cd /usr/local/assp; /usr/bin/perl ./rebuildspamdb.pl
#
0 3 * * * cd /usr/local/assp; /usr/bin/perl ./rebuildspamdb.pl | mail
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Otherwise cron will email it to the user
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
Outlookers, as I call them
I think, you are right to call them names )).The only reason for such
behaviour was Outlook which did it by default. Period.
Now you can read amazing explanations of something which cannot be
reasonable explained. Really amazing
Hill, Brett wrote:
No one was saying that everyone used it, or even SHOULD use it (I wish
they would, but thats irrelevant)
An official standard would be nice. I just don't forsee it anytime
soon.
-- is an official standard.
GrayHat wrote:
According to the following sources
http://www.gfi.com/news/en/mp3spam.htm
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2201466/pump-dump-spammers-tell-users
http://www.symantec.com/enterprise/security_response/weblog/2007/10/mp3_version_of_pumpanddump_sto.html
Norbert Doeberlein wrote:
So ASSP utilizes the SMTP server for helo, mailfrom, and mailto?
ASSP utilised the SMTP for server for all the SMTP conversation - it
just snoops and interrupts when it see something it wants to block.
It's a PROXY - it just intermediates - it doesn't take over
Charles Marcus wrote:
Or this:
The relation between collected Spam and Ham wordpairs is called the
\'Norm\'(Normality).
Ideally you want to keep the Norm as close to \'1,0\' as possible -
which means an equal number of ham to spam wordpairs - but
David wrote:
I'm looking into the possibility of getting ASSP to listen on more
ports. Is it possible and feasible to use IPTables to get another port,
like 2525, to forward internally to port 25/26 that ASSP listens on?
Yes - I do this for the very same reasons you describe. It's a pretty
M. Waseem Sindhu wrote:
Okay. I set it to '0.00500'. Can't set to 0 due to some testing. Bellow is a
message tagged as [SPAM] with following headers...
X-Assp-Received-RBL: pass
X-Assp-Received-URIBL: pass
X-Assp-Bayes-Confidence: 0.0
Confidence is 0 so the email
Due to the nature our setup here I have 250 users that receive email
forwarded from other accounts on external mail servers. The only
anti-spam processing I can apply to these emails here is content based.
Whilst using URIBL and Clamd with Sane Security sigs catches a lot of
SPAM it falls
When reporting to the email interface I get -
Undefined subroutine main::matchIP called at bin/assp.pl line 7718.
There are two references to matchIP but I couldn't see it defined anywhere.
-
This SF.net email is sponsored
Greg Wright wrote:
Hi all.
Is ASSP with ClamAV integrated good enough to protect a domain (with no
local administrator) from virus threats?
On a windows network I would suggest always using a desktop filter
also. I use Sophos (and am a Sophos reseller if you need a licence ;) )
and
Yes - get well soon Fritz!
Anyone interested in a collection to send him something to cheer himself
up with ?
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and
ag wrote:
Hello,
I've been running Assp 1.2.6 for a while now, and have run into a
strange issue. Every couple of days, I get complaints from my users
stating that email to their domains is bouncing with a 'Relaying not
allowed' error. I look at the localDomains entry in the assp.cfg,
Ethan Albone wrote:
What do you think to integrate this on clamd assp ?
http://www.sanesecurity.com/clamav/index.htm
I've been using them for a while now and almost two thirds of all my
SPAM is caught by these sigs.
-
Ethan Albone wrote:
I have this list too , if you read carefully my email you understand
the problem is another. These email were all rejected due to invalid
address.
The problem starts when you receive 10 email seconds to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] always using always a new ip .
It overloads
Charles Marcus wrote:
Andrew Porter wrote:
Ethan Albone wrote:
I have this list too , if you read carefully my email you understand
the problem is another. These email were all rejected due to invalid
address.
The problem starts when you receive 10 email seconds to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] always
On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 11:34 -0500, Internet Chicago Staff wrote:
I've got no maximum set, but the service continues to reject new connections
to the point that I have to restart it to start getting messages again
Have you tried setting STMP Idle Timeout to something sensible ? I used
to get
Kevin wrote:
Wait a sec.
I thought you said you had a Blackberry Server?
Are you using the desktop redirector?
No - I host Blackberrys for people that cannot for whatever reason host
them themselves. They either do a forward to my mail server or I
collect for them via pop3/imap etc..
On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 10:49 -0700, Kevin wrote:
Why not use the 'Unprocessed Addresses' field?
They whine if they receive SPAM on their blackberrys. I do tell them
that it's /their/ SPAM that they have forwarded to me but it's still
seen as my problem to stop it.
I also have other hosted
On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 11:15 -0700, Kevin wrote:
If you know the IP it is forwarded from I believe you can add it to the
'ISP/Secondary MX Servers' field.
Problem is I have 180 Blackberry users and collecting all their IP
addresses would be arduous - and some forward on via their ISPs
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
Please try the latest built .
Have just updated and it seems to be working as advertised now :)
Mar-14-07 19:30:15 id-39006156 198.17.114.39 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regex:ContentonlyRe
Thanks Fritz :)
On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 10:30 -0500, Mehul N. Sanghvi wrote:
I'm a Debian user. I have been looking around for something to package for
Debian, and I think ASSP fits that very well. I had thought about doing this
independently, but if the project can use what I do, I have no problems in
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 11:16 -0800, Kevin wrote:
How did that answer his questions?
What are you - the answers police ?
For your information there is often some misunderstanding of what the
ASSP sleep did (as it is now gone). As I explained - other anti-spam
systems do more than just
On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 03:23 -0800, Kevin wrote:
Thats like him asking how to start the car and you telling him how the
engine works, it's good information but it doesn't help him.
And that needed pointing out for what reasons ?
Perhaps now that he knows a little more about how starting the
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 18:28 +0100, Gregor Reich wrote:
This is a simple and properly working solution. But our clients won't
think good about us and the product if we give them this kind of login
procedure. They are used to type in the URL (at most we can let them
type https) and the the
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 15:55 +0100, Matti Haack wrote:
Hello,
there was a option to add a wait time before the SMTP-Greeting is
send. Is this value still uesed in the last builds of ASSP?
Which is the name of the var in the config?
All this did was sleep before sending the greeting. One
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 09:28 -0500, Robert Temple wrote:
ASSP is doing a great job for my servers, but I've noticed Paypal
phishing email keeps getting through.
The Sane Security Virus Signatures are stopping these for me - had loads
today.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 16:05 +0100, Gregor Reich wrote:
Hi Andrew, thanks for your reply.
My assp only listens on localhost for the web interface. When I need
access I just use ssh to tunnel to it -
ssh -L :localhost:5 myserver
and access it with
http://localhost: in
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 06:12 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
In 'Validate Local Addresses' I have set 'Local Addresses' to
'file:LocalAddresses.txt' which also contains 2 lines -
'@domain1.tld','@domain2.tld'
Hopefully you are planning on populating this file with all of your
valid
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 16:01 +0100, Gregor Reich wrote:
I just want to ask again if somebody has a solution: (are you really
using it via normal http?)
I'm confused as to why you are running assp in the tunnel command line.
Shouldn't you have assp running full time and just be tunnelling to
On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 16:41 +0100, Philippe Schelté wrote:
I'm not sure but ASSP seems to do it; please look to my post Fetchmail
backwards again ...
That's fetchmail raising bounces - you can tell it not to.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 05:51 -0800, Dave Emory wrote:
The file is indeed empty. Where does the file content come from? If it's
manual, what should be put in the file?
There used to be a DNS Blacklist that you could download (getdnsbl
script iirc - wget -q --timestamping
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 10:29 -0500, Dickie Bradford wrote:
I have seen where a address is marked as spam (or potential spammer) and the
mail program will send a email back to the sender to verify if the sender is
legitimate, does ASSP have this ability?
I hope not - it's never a good thing
53 matches
Mail list logo
