> First, suggestion, turn off the bug in qmail, it is not the place for it, if 
> you want it, look to make a filter in ASSP that does this.

I think you have to get back to the basics...

First of all qmail's behavior is NOT a bug. That message is not according to 
specs. Even repairing the message by a mailer is explicitly mentioned as bad 
behavior.

The sender has a bug, so (optionally) refusing these mails in ASSP is a good 
idea. One should stop a malformed message as early in the chain as possible...
Another mailer in the chain could accept the message and later on a mailer 
doesn't. The only way to inform the sender is through a NDR which may create 
backscatter....

The only "misconfiguration" on qmail is that it doesn't have extensive logging. 
Something which hasn't been necessary for 7 years.

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Scott Haneda [mailto:talkli...@newgeo.com] 
Verzonden: zondag 18 oktober 2009 0:44
Aan: ASSP development mailing list
Onderwerp: Re: [Assp-test] Bare LF's rejected by Qmail but undetected by ASSP

I am not sure I would agree with that.  It would create a mess.  It is  
a proxy, and in all reality, 99% of the time, you do not want your MTA  
to send back much to ASSP.

For example, say you have greylisting on in your MTA, which you should  
not, but every message, of perhaps thousands, is going to send back a  
message to ASSP, that says, try again later, over and over.  The  
reality of this is, you would have a misconfiguration.  You want your  
MTA to do no rejections of any form.  ASSP does the rejections, your  
MTA, in most cases, should accept all email.

First, suggestion, turn off the bug in qmail, it is not the place for  
it, if you want it, look to make a filter in ASSP that does this.

Your problem seems to be that qmail is misconfigured.  You previously  
stated in one of the threads here that the sender would try again.   
This tells me that qmail is not liking the bare lf, but then sending a  
temporary failure.

There is a 0% chance that the bare LF is going to fix itself, so there  
is a 100% chance that qmail is responding incorrectly.  Bare LF is not  
a transient error, it is not like greylisting, where there is a need  
to try again.

What you are dealing with, is very much like if you did not have  
synchronization with your users database from ASSP to qmail.  So ASSP  
passes along a message to user_not_th...@example.com. Qmail gets it,  
and sees that user_not_there does not exist.  Instead of permanent  
failure, it says, try again.

Since the try again rate is not determined by you, but by the sender,  
this would be a fair vector for DDOS'ing the ASSP proxy.  If ASSP  
starts logging your bare LF return messages from qmail, all I need do  
is send a few hundred bare lf messages to you, and set the retry  
interval on the sending mta to 1 second.  I will have now started to  
overload your ASSP by invoking your remote MTA to chatter way too much  
to ASSP.  In most cases, ASSP is on the same subnet as the MTA, it has  
GB/s lines to use full resources, it is whitelisted by IP, it has full  
right to pass along the attack.

This is also a known bug in qmail, as far as I remember.  Search for  
"qmail bare lf patch".  Personally, I would not patch it, just disable  
it, it is a setting that can not work.  Hotmail sends a barelf in  
almost all their emails.  Yes, it is rfc wrong, but there are too many  
legitimate MTA's out there that are broken.

The only acceptable fix for this to me would be for ASSP to suggest  
the regex for a user to enabled LF checking, and only do so on a  
weighted basis.  If it can not be done in regex, which I would find  
hard to believe, it is a feature not worth taking the time to implement.

Maybe, just maybe, ASSP could have a "rewrite bare lf's" feature, but  
I am not sure I like that idea much either.

My .02
-- 
Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott@ *

On Oct 17, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Jean-Pierre van Melis wrote:

> I still think it would improve ASSP if it would log MTA's response  
> code which it is proxying...


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your
developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay 
ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your
developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay 
ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test

Reply via email to