On Mar 27, 2019, at 2:24 PM, Iosif Fettich <[email protected]> wrote:
> I saw in the original mail you had findtime = 600. Is it possible that you 
> simply have no new hits, whereas the existing ones are already obsoleted?

Thanks for the thought, but no.  I watched hits come into the log in real time 
with no corresponding response by fail2ban (by which I mean fail2ban didn't 
even log a match on the rule, like it does with every other rule).  I also 
telnetted into port 25 to cause those hits myself, and again, no response.

> Try to go for a debugging strategy.  Make failregexp a simple letter or word 
> (ok, risking to ban everything for a minute...). If that doesn't catch 
> anything, you'd know for sure that it's not the regexp that doesn't work.

Just to reiterate, all of my other sendmail filters -- including custom filters 
-- work just fine.  And fail2ban-regex matches properly using this filter.  I'm 
not sure how it can be the regexp, if fail2ban-regex matches every line it's 
supposed to match.

If fail2ban-server uses different regexp match code than fail2ban-regex, then 
that may explain why fail2ban-regex works while fail2ban-server doesn't... but 
then that would be a bug.  But fail2ban-regex is matching everything it's 
supposed to, even while fail2ban-server does not.

How can I debug that?

> Change the logfile. See if fail2ban choses the right one.

All my other sendmail filters use the same logfile, and they're working fine, 
as above.

Thanks.

--- Amir

_______________________________________________
Fail2ban-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fail2ban-users

Reply via email to