qmail Digest 28 Oct 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 1167
Topics (messages 51163 through 51251):
moving a part of my queue to a ramdisk ?
51163 by: Nicolas Deslions
51174 by: Charles Cazabon
51183 by: Sean Reifschneider
51224 by: James R Grinter
Re: What to do about these barelinefeeds?
51164 by: Hubbard, David
51216 by: Markus Stumpf
how to modified the send datetime?
51165 by: SJ
51166 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
Refuse large mails with multiple RCPTs
51167 by: Oliver Hitz
unsubscribing from qmail list a project in itself
51168 by: McGillicuddy, Dennis
51189 by: Dave Sill
51201 by: Andy Bradford
NO CONFIG-FAST Script
51169 by: Anthony Abby
51175 by: Charles Cazabon
51178 by: Anthony Abby
51179 by: Chris Johnson
Re: Documentation Specialist Seeking Contract Work
51170 by: Dave Kitabjian
51173 by: Anthony Abby
51180 by: Vince Vielhaber
51184 by: Brett Randall
Resending large bulks of mail!
51171 by: Wilson, Frank
51176 by: Charles Cazabon
51196 by: Andy Bradford
Re: Question about OpenBSD and FD_SET()
51172 by: Collin B. McClendon
unsubscribe qmail
51177 by: Mike Brown
51186 by: Scott Sanders
51190 by: Brett Randall
51197 by: Landon Evans
51199 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes
51207 by: Brett Randall
51209 by: Robin S. Socha
51212 by: Jeremy Stanley
51220 by: Adam McKenna
51227 by: Kris Kelley
51233 by: David Dyer-Bennet
51235 by: Adam McKenna
51237 by: markd.bushwire.net
51242 by: Andy Bradford
51243 by: Andy Bradford
51245 by: janjan
51246 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
51248 by: David Dyer-Bennet
SMTP/POP3 problems
51181 by: jahall.nea.org
51206 by: Timothy Legant
51214 by: Alexander Jernejcic
error compiling qmail Suse 6.4
51182 by: Schwarz Hans-Juergen
51194 by: Clemens Hermann
Re: User password change using web. Suggestions?
51185 by: Sean Reifschneider
51191 by: Wesley Wannemacher
SPAM - Help!
51187 by: Ari Arantes Filho
51192 by: Tim Hunter
51193 by: markd.bushwire.net
51202 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes
51203 by: Tim Hunter
51204 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes
51205 by: Mira Tempir
51215 by: markd.bushwire.net
51217 by: markd.bushwire.net
51218 by: Clemens Hermann
51221 by: Markus Stumpf
51225 by: markd.bushwire.net
51226 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes
51229 by: micha.network.ecore.net
Re: QMail RPM buggy...
51188 by: Sean Reifschneider
Re: Is there a bug in the pop3 server?
51195 by: Peter van Dijk
Seamless e-mail virus scanner?
51198 by: Bill Parker
51210 by: Brett Randall
51211 by: Brian Johnson
51234 by: Robin S. Socha
Re: unsubscribe
51200 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes
51208 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes
51213 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes
Re: Queuing outgoing PPP mail to multiple ISPs
51219 by: Wm
is there any way to move messages to the front of qmail's queue?
51222 by: Greg Jorgensen
How many outbound messages can you send per hour?
51223 by: Greg Jorgensen
51230 by: markd.bushwire.net
51232 by: Austad, Jay
Per user RBL or RSS
51228 by: Robert J. Adams
51247 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
quick question on queuing mails
51231 by: marlon abao (TS-US)
51236 by: markd.bushwire.net
Problem with sqwebmail + qmail-scanner
51238 by: davi.avati.com.br
51244 by: Andy Bradford
51250 by: Einar Bordewich
Queued messages not sending (error #4.1.1)
51239 by: Something Unusual
How to customize bounced back messages
51240 by: Yu Wang
problem with supervise
51241 by: Chris Hackman
fixcrio
51249 by: Austad, Jay
qmail-queue patch
51251 by: lkhanna.hughes-ecomm.com
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi
I'm running a fbsd/qmail system with around 500 concurrent qmail-remote
processes.
The problem now is the speed on my raid system... it's not fast enough to
handle all the incoming mails and i get the not yet preprocessed growing
fast.
I'm thinking about using a 500Mb ramdisk on /var/qmail/queue/todo
Anyone already done something like that or does it seems stupid ? ;p
Nicolas Deslions
System, network and security admin
Net2one.com, France
20 rue du Sentier 75002 Paris
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.net2one.com
Nicolas Deslions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem now is the speed on my raid system... it's not fast enough to
> handle all the incoming mails and i get the not yet preprocessed growing
> fast.
>
> I'm thinking about using a 500Mb ramdisk on /var/qmail/queue/todo
>
> Anyone already done something like that or does it seems stupid ? ;p
I could be wrong, but I believe all of the queue has to reside on the same
filesystem, so this wouldn't work.
Are you using Russell Nelson's big-todo patch? This could help. It's on
www.qmail.org. There's a section there on big/high-performance servers and
various ideas/patches that help.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:26:50PM +0200, Nicolas Deslions wrote:
>I'm thinking about using a 500Mb ramdisk on /var/qmail/queue/todo
AFAIK, you need to put the entire /var/qmail/queue on the same
drive. As mentioned, make sure that you're using the big-todo
patches. However, note that moving the queue to a ram-disc
will not prevent the todo queue from growing fast. It's fairly
easy to swamp it with incoming mail...
I'd try modifying qmail-smtpd so that it pauses when the todo gets
too large. Probably using some complicated scheme so that every
incoming connection doesn't walk the todo, but that's just my style.
;-)
Sean
--
Get your data structures correct first, and the rest of the program will
write itself. -- David Jones
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
Sean Reifschneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd try modifying qmail-smtpd so that it pauses when the todo gets
> too large. Probably using some complicated scheme so that every
> incoming connection doesn't walk the todo, but that's just my style.
The biggest cause of this, that I have, is the expansion of mailing
lists - one email in becomes many hundred outbound.
To mitigate this I've reduced my localconcurrency (which will mean
single mails queued behind mail expansions), but a better way might be
for my mailing list software to detect the impending situation and
return a temporary deferral.
James.
Thanks Adam, that is exactly what I needed to know.
I'm assuming that all I need to do is edit qmail-smtpd.c
and change this:
void straynewline() { out("451 See
http://pobox.com/~djb/docs/smtplf.html.\r\n"); flush(); _exit(1); }
To:
void straynewline() { out("553 See
http://pobox.com/~djb/docs/smtplf.html.\r\n"); flush(); _exit(1); }
Yeah, MS's SMTP service was hitting my server once per
second for a few hours before I noticed, what a piece of
garbage...
Thanks,
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam McKenna [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:19 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: What to do about these barelinefeeds?
On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 11:31:01PM -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
> Thanks, I hadn't seen that link before. I'm sorry, I meant
> that the 256 was the status code I see in my smtpd log.
> But, in searching the archives, I saw reference to people
> saying the bare LF generates a 451 and not a 553. I can't
> verify that since I don't have a mailer to try it with
> but it seems that you'd never want the 451 in this case
> because obviously it will be the same mailer that will
> retry each time and it will continue to be broken for each
> try...
You're right, I grepped my source for it but I forgot that I had modified
the
source to produce a permanent error code instead of a temporary one to avoid
the exact problem you are describing (M$ S(hitty)MTP service hammering my
server.)
On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 08:29:42PM -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
> 1) Does anyone have a list of commonly used mail
> servers that violate this?
I've seen mainly Lotus, MS, Novell and even Netscape Mailserver running
on Solaris producing this kind of problems.
>From my experience most of the failures result from bounces. MTAs that
otherwise act rather smoothly send bare LFs when they produce bounces.
If you have a look at the lists of bugfixes for each micro release of
ths mailservers I wonder how those work at all.
For the problem with the Microsoft SMTP hammering on other mailservers
this is a Microsoft confirmed bug. The fix is already about one year old
but the fix is not publicly available and one has to pay for it (by
calling Microsoft Product Support Services with a $200 fee in order
to get it mailed three days later)
The info is at
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q224/9/83.ASP
and you'll have to get
Smtpsvc.dll 5.5.1877.20
I don't know of any other fixes for the other MTAs. (I have spent at
least 3 hours searching databases and reading bug fix lists at Novell
and Lotus)
If someone has any information I'd be really glad getting it.
One note though: I have patched qmail-qmtpd to log bare LF rejects
and checking those hosts for relay open MTAs I have a hit rate of
about 80%, so blocking MTAs sending base LFs is a good SPAM protection ;-))
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
when I send message at 11:00 , but when I receive the letter, it
tell me the time is 2:00.
I trace the source program, the time which the qmail-inject get is
not right also.
How to modify it?
> when I send message at 11:00 , but when I receive the letter, it
> tell me the time is 2:00.
What does the header contain? May be your MUA plays tricks with the date
header to display local time.
> I trace the source program, the time which the qmail-inject get is
> not right also.
> How to modify it?
qmail-inject inserts a date header only if there is none. If you don't
like qmail-inject's behaviour to use UTC, you have to supply a date
header when injecting mail.
Regards, Frank
Hi,
Some of our users are regularly wasting bandwidth by sending
large emails to multiple recipients. Since large mails can be
quite useful, we would not like to impose limits on the message
size in general. A solution would be to refuse only large mails
with many recipients. Is there a patch or an add-on for qmail
that allows to do that?
Apologies if this has already been discussed. I was unable to
find any reference to it in the mailing list.
Thanks in advance,
Oliver
Title: Dennis USA Stationery
|
Howdy qmailers
I have been burnt again. This is the second
list that I have subscibed to and it just so happens that it is also the second
list I have had trouble unsubscribing from. Perhaps one of you knows the secret
of how to do this and will be kind enough to share it with me. Just in case you
think that I have not tried the right method, I have included what I have done
so far:
- sent an
email with messages in the subject and header to the same address. (several
times)
Perhaps there
is a administrator/listmaster that will take pity on me and kill my subscription
before I pull ALL my hair out.
Thanks
Dennis
======================
Dennis J. McGillicuddy
Unix System Administrator
Tech Ops
Tay1
Compaq Corporation
Littleton, MA
978-506-5001
|
"McGillicuddy, Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have been burnt again. This is the second list that I have subscibed to
>and it just so happens that it is also the second list I have had trouble
>unsubscribing from. Perhaps one of you knows the secret of how to do this
>and will be kind enough to share it with me. Just in case you think that I
>have not tried the right method, I have included what I have done so far:
>
>- sent a blank email to <mailto:> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" .
>(several times)
And what happened?
>- sent a request for help to unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Did you receive a response?
Has your address changed since you joined the list? If so, try this:
To specify a subscription/unsubscription address, say
[EMAIL PROTECTED], send the message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Examine the headers of message from the list for clues about the
address you subscribed under.
-Dave
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:56:05 EDT, "McGillicuddy, Dennis" wrote:
> - sent a blank email to <mailto:> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" .
> (several times)
It is possible that you aren't actually on the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
list, but on one of the sublists. Look at the headers of the messages
you are receiving to find out.
Andy
I'm trying to configure QMail, and I'm at the part where I need to set up my
ME config file. My box isn;t hooked up yet so I want to run the conf-fast
script in /var/qmail/configure/ only it appears I have no
/var/qmail/configure/ directory!! I ran find on the entire /var/qmail/
directory and it just isn't there. Anyone have any idea what might have
happened to it?
Anthony
Anthony Abby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm trying to configure QMail, and I'm at the part where I need to set up my
> ME config file. My box isn;t hooked up yet so I want to run the conf-fast
> script in /var/qmail/configure/ only it appears I have no
> /var/qmail/configure/ directory!! I ran find on the entire /var/qmail/
> directory and it just isn't there. Anyone have any idea what might have
> happened to it?
The directory the control files reside in is /var/qmail/control .
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The directory the control files reside in is /var/qmail/control .
>
Charles:
When you install QMail /var/qmail/control/ is empty, and can remain so
except for the me file. Reading through the Rich Blum "Running QMail" book,
there is supposed to be a /var/qmail/configure/ directory with .config and
config-fast in it. That's the directory that's missing. If I look through
/usr/local/src/qmail-1.03/ I see config-fast there and can run it from
there, (just found it a few minutes ago), but should the configure directory
have been created during install? Just wondering. Thanks.
Anthony
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 09:45:56AM -0400, Anthony Abby wrote:
> When you install QMail /var/qmail/control/ is empty,
Not if you follow the INSTALL document that comes with the source tarball.
> and can remain so except for the me file. Reading through the Rich Blum
> "Running QMail" book, there is supposed to be a /var/qmail/configure/
> directory with .config and config-fast in it. That's the directory that's
> missing. If I look through /usr/local/src/qmail-1.03/ I see config-fast
> there and can run it from there, (just found it a few minutes ago), but
> should the configure directory have been created during install? Just
> wondering. Thanks.
No, there is no /var/qmail/configure directory created during install, nor does
qmail use such a directory.
If you follow the INSTALL document, you'll run config or config-fast, which
lives in the qmail source tree.
Chris
Since nobody else seems able to do it, maybe you should write a book on
qmail?
Dave
;)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 10:05 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Documentation Specialist Seeking Contract Work
>
>
> Documentation Specialists Seeking Contract Work - Technical Writing,
> Editing,Graphics, Robohelp, HTML, SGML, etc.
>
> Senior technical writers, senior editors, project leaders and
> electronic documentation
> specialists seek contract work. Clients have included companies such
> as Microsoft and Koch Petroleum. Excellent communication skills, able
> to work with all levels of the company from programmers to CEO.
> Excellent background in technical, marketing and creative writing.
> Familiar with educational material as well as e-commerce.
> Writing samples, full resume and references available on request.
>
> Experience in creating both published and online documentation.
>
> REQUIRED:
> Prefer Corp to Corp Sole relationship directly with the client.
> Agents are also welcome in the same capacity.
>
> Production is done at our facility. We are fully equipped.
>
> PLEASE REPLY ONLY BY PHONE
> Contact - Casey Lea or Domhnall CGN Adams, CS -
>
> TO INQUIRE ABOUT SERVICES, AVAILABILITY, OR TO CONFIRM
> REMOVAL FROM OUR LIST
> CALL 780-998-4066 PST
>
> Rates: Fees are charged by the hour or by the project.
> _________________________________________________________
> This Message was Composed by a user of Extractor Pro '98 Bulk
> E- Mail Software. If
> you wish to be removed from this advertiser's future
> mailings, please reply
> with the subject "Remove" and this software will
> automatically block you
> from their future mailings.
>
>
>
There are two books on QMail. The first was written by Rich Blum in
September and is available through Barnes & Noble or Amazon. The second
book has not been released yet, but is expected to be so by Christmas.
I bought the Rich Blum book (Running Qmail) yesterday and find it pretty
well writtem, but I still have some questions about configuration because of
my Linux inexperience.
Anthony
> Since nobody else seems able to do it, maybe you should write a book on
> qmail?
>
> Dave
> ;)
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Anthony Abby wrote:
> There are two books on QMail. The first was written by Rich Blum in
> September and is available through Barnes & Noble or Amazon. The second
> book has not been released yet, but is expected to be so by Christmas.
>
> I bought the Rich Blum book (Running Qmail) yesterday and find it pretty
> well writtem, but I still have some questions about configuration because of
> my Linux inexperience.
Since you just bought it yesterday you may still be able to get your
money back.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pop4.net
128K ISDN from $22.00/mo - 56K Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
>>>>> "Vince" == Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I bought the Rich Blum book (Running Qmail) yesterday and find it
>> pretty well writtem, but I still have some questions about
>> configuration because of my Linux inexperience.
Vince> Since you just bought it yesterday you may still be able to
Vince> get your money back.
What they fail to tell you when you buy the book is that there was a
printing error. The actual title of the book was meant to be "Running
[away from] Qmail". Now that I've abused it for the first time (for
me) on this list, is the author a member of the list?
--
"I'm not dumb. I just have a command of throughly useless
information."
- Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes
Im using Qmail with VPOPMAIL.
My MX records look like this :
MX 10 mail.web-trade.com.
MX 20 be.wise.no.
This means of course, that when mail.web-trade.com is down, the mail will be
stored localy in the postmaster account on be.wise.no.
My question is.. is there a easy way to put all the messages in the
postmaster account into the outgoing queue, and just have qmail
resend the hole lot?
best regards,
Frank James Wilson
Hostmaster Web Trade Norway AS
Rusløkkveien 14, N-0123 Oslo, Norway
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +47 24 13 48 00, Fax: +47 24 13 48 01
Dir: +47 24 13 48 35, GSM:+47 99 55 30 35
Wilson, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Im using Qmail with VPOPMAIL.
> My MX records look like this :
>
> MX 10 mail.web-trade.com.
> MX 20 be.wise.no.
>
> This means of course, that when mail.web-trade.com is down, the mail will be
> stored localy in the postmaster account on be.wise.no.
Only if be.wise.no is misconfigured.
> My question is.. is there a easy way to put all the messages in the
> postmaster account into the outgoing queue, and just have qmail
> resend the hole lot?
maildir2smtp could be your friend here. However, it won't be necessary if
be.wise.no is configured properly. If it is only supposed to be a backup
MX for whatever domain you're looking at (I suppose its web-trade.com), then
this domain should be listed only in rcpthosts on be.wise.no, not in
locals or virtualdomains. It will automatically stay in the queue and be
delivered to mail.web-trade.com when it comes back up.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:50:46 +0200, "Wilson, Frank" wrote:
> This means of course, that when mail.web-trade.com is down, the mail will be
> stored localy in the postmaster account on be.wise.no.
You must have configured it do deliver email locally then. If you
simply accept the mail and not deliver it, it should remain in that
mail server's queue until it can forward it on to mail.web-trade.com
Andy
Well the modifications I made to sys/sys/types.h and in qmail source have
done it!
I set FD_SET to 2048 in the OpenBSD kernel header and applied the
big-concurrency patch.
I am getting 512/512 outgoing connections. I am also getting 8500 deliveries
started in 3 minutes,
which is just grand.
-Collin
-----Original Message-----
From: Nicolas Deslions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 3:34 AM
To: 'Collin B. McClendon'; 'Qmail List (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Question about OpenBSD and FD_SET()
Hi,
On my FreeBSD system i modified the file /usr/include/sys/types.h
i changed "#define FD_SETSIZE 1024" to 2048
I don't know if open bsd has the maxusers options in the kernel config file
but if it's there u should put something like 256 there.
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Collin B. McClendon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Envoyé : Wednesday, October 25, 2000 23:46
À : Qmail List (E-mail)
Objet : Question about OpenBSD and FD_SET()
Hello,
I'm trying to put together a high volume mail server using qmail and
OpenBSD. Has anyone found what kernel paramater one would
need to get beyond the hidden file descriptor limit of 256? So far I'm
getting about 20,000 emails and hour going out with
concurrency of 120.
Thanks,
Collin
unsubscribe qmail
Mike Brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
302-326-5820
888-559-5550 (Tech Support)
Me too
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 8:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: unsubscribe qmail
unsubscribe qmail
Mike Brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
302-326-5820
888-559-5550 (Tech Support)
>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Scott> Me too
I'll third that!
--
"But what...is it good for?"
- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968,
commenting on the microchip
unsubscribe qmail
Landon Evans
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Are you people sending mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] from your
signed e-mail addresses?
You should look at the mail header of this message and see what's your
address.
The very first (mostly) is something like this:
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Which means I'm subscribed to qmail list as [EMAIL PROTECTED] So I
should send mailing list request as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try it and you'll need no administrator/listmaster help.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Se você não encontra
o sentido das coisas
é porque este não
se encontra, se cria.
Antoine Saint-Exupéry
>>>>> "Landon" == Landon Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Landon> unsubscribe qmail
Oh no! Its contagious!!!
--
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943
* Landon Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001027 13:18]:
> unsubscribe qmail
Now, Landon, take a look at this:
http://cr.yp.to/lists.html#qmail
"To subscribe, send an empty message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Kinda makes one wonder what would happen if one sent an empty message
to [EMAIL PROTECTED], eh? And sometimes, one is also
tempted to wonder if the admission test for American universities
is to be able to write your own name.
--
If you are too low a lifeform to be able to learn how to use the
manual page subsystem, why should we help you?
(Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Daniel Augusto Fernandes wrote:
[snip]
> You should look at the mail header of this message and see what's your
> address.
> The very first (mostly) is something like this:
>
> > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[clip]
Great, except that it doesn't seem to exist on my messages. The following
is pulled straight from a list message sitting in my imap maildir:
Received: (qmail 20963 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2000 17:24:26 -0000
Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu (131.193.178.181)
by mail.foveon.com with SMTP; 27 Oct 2000 17:24:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 10241 invoked by uid 1002); 27 Oct 2000 16:02:44 -0000
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 5165 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2000 16:02:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nermal.donbest.com) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 27 Oct 2000 16:02:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 17052 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2000 16:02:49 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO newdbc) (192.168.3.2)
by 205.199.214.25 with SMTP; 27 Oct 2000 16:02:49 -0000
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:03:41 -0700
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Bill Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Seamless e-mail virus scanner?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
And that's all there is before the message body... Clues?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy Stanley, Information Security Specialist Foveon Corporation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 01:28:38PM -0400, Robin S. Socha wrote:
> * Landon Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001027 13:18]:
> > unsubscribe qmail
>
> Now, Landon, take a look at this:
> http://cr.yp.to/lists.html#qmail
> "To subscribe, send an empty message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
> Kinda makes one wonder what would happen if one sent an empty message
> to [EMAIL PROTECTED], eh? And sometimes, one is also
> tempted to wonder if the admission test for American universities
> is to be able to write your own name.
Actually, someone brought this up recently, and I didn't have an explanation
for them -- why does ezmlm subscribe the envelope sender instead of the
address in From: ?
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "No matter how much it changes,
http://flounder.net/publickey.html | technology's just a bunch of wires
GPG: 17A4 11F7 5E7E C2E7 08AA | connected to a bunch of other wires."
38B0 05D0 8BF7 2C6D 110A | Joe Rogan, _NewsRadio_
3:36pm up 139 days, 12:52, 11 users, load average: 0.00, 0.03, 0.02
> Actually, someone brought this up recently, and I didn't have an
explanation
> for them -- why does ezmlm subscribe the envelope sender instead of the
> address in From: ?
Probably to help curb, if only slightly, the possibility of somebody
subscribing somebody else without the latter person's knowledge. Depending
on your ISP, faking the envelope sender could be more difficult than faking
the "From:" header.
---Kris Kelley
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 27 October 2000 at 15:37:01 -0400
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 01:28:38PM -0400, Robin S. Socha wrote:
> > * Landon Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001027 13:18]:
> > > unsubscribe qmail
> >
> > Now, Landon, take a look at this:
> > http://cr.yp.to/lists.html#qmail
> > "To subscribe, send an empty message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> >
> > Kinda makes one wonder what would happen if one sent an empty message
> > to [EMAIL PROTECTED], eh? And sometimes, one is also
> > tempted to wonder if the admission test for American universities
> > is to be able to write your own name.
>
> Actually, someone brought this up recently, and I didn't have an explanation
> for them -- why does ezmlm subscribe the envelope sender instead of the
> address in From: ?
My understanding is that the underlying belief is that the envelope
sender will be configured invalidly less often. I don't know if
anybody has profiled this assumption, or how you'd come up with a
sample considered representative to make such measurements on. My
personal belief is that this is a mistake. And of course it's the
primary cause of the very very frequent unsubscribe hassle.
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 04:03:02PM -0500, Kris Kelley wrote:
> > Actually, someone brought this up recently, and I didn't have an
> explanation
> > for them -- why does ezmlm subscribe the envelope sender instead of the
> > address in From: ?
>
> Probably to help curb, if only slightly, the possibility of somebody
> subscribing somebody else without the latter person's knowledge. Depending
> on your ISP, faking the envelope sender could be more difficult than faking
> the "From:" header.
That's why ezmlm creates a random tag for each subscription that is sent back
to the subscriber for confirmation. There is no way to subscribe someone
else to an ezmlm list unless you have access to their mail spool.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "No matter how much it changes,
http://flounder.net/publickey.html | technology's just a bunch of wires
GPG: 17A4 11F7 5E7E C2E7 08AA | connected to a bunch of other wires."
38B0 05D0 8BF7 2C6D 110A | Joe Rogan, _NewsRadio_
5:49pm up 139 days, 15:05, 11 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
> > Actually, someone brought this up recently, and I didn't have an explanation
> > for them -- why does ezmlm subscribe the envelope sender instead of the
> > address in From: ?
>
> My understanding is that the underlying belief is that the envelope
> sender will be configured invalidly less often. I don't know if
Hmm. Maybe I'm confused. How do people think the envelope sender
value is determined in the first instant? Eg, how does Eudora go from
a mail in a window to "Mail From: " in SMTP? Or how does qmail-inject
for that matter?
The answer is that it's mostly derived from a parse of the various
headers in the original mail when it's injected into the MTA. In
many cases the most likely header that will be used to derive the
envelope sender will be the From: header. So to suggest that the
unparsed From: header is a better place to look for the sender
seems a bit silly to me because in many cases the envelope sender is
simply a parsed version of the From: header.
Regards.
Thus said Daniel Augusto Fernandes on Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:07:49 -0200:
> You should look at the mail header of this message and see what's your
> address.
> The very first (mostly) is something like this:
>
> > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unfortunately, the return-path may not always be available... My ISP
for instance uses exim which must be stripping the Return-Path header
because emails that I get through them never have it.
Andy
--
[-----------[system uptime]--------------------------------------------]
6:56pm up 20 days, 22:23, 4 users, load average: 1.15, 1.29, 1.25
Thus said Adam McKenna on Fri, 27 Oct 2000 17:51:03 EDT:
> That's why ezmlm creates a random tag for each subscription that is sent back
> to the subscriber for confirmation. There is no way to subscribe someone
> else to an ezmlm list unless you have access to their mail spool.
Then, what is to be done in the event that the reply-to header is set
as well and it is different from the from? I believe that the sender
is the most reliable for subscription/unsubscription. It probably
wouldn't be hard to patch ezmlm to use from though if you wanted. :-)
Andy
--
[-----------[system uptime]--------------------------------------------]
7:07pm up 20 days, 22:34, 4 users, load average: 1.06, 1.17, 1.21
mee too!
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 03:39:43PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hmm. Maybe I'm confused. How do people think the envelope sender
> value is determined in the first instant? Eg, how does Eudora go from
> a mail in a window to "Mail From: " in SMTP? Or how does qmail-inject
> for that matter?
>
qmail-inject uses environment variables for From (not From:). Depending on your MUA,
it can use different ones. For example, most text-mode MUAs running in
the same machine as qmail-inject (my case) use $USER or $LOGNAME.
And the default envelope sender equals "From".
For those who do not use qmail-inject directly (Like those using remote
SMTP with Eudora, to use your example), the "From" is generated by the MUA.
So yes, those cases are "hopeless". "From:" will almost certainly be the base
for "From"
> The answer is that it's mostly derived from a parse of the various
> headers in the original mail when it's injected into the MTA. In
> many cases the most likely header that will be used to derive the
> envelope sender will be the From: header. So to suggest that the
> unparsed From: header is a better place to look for the sender
> seems a bit silly to me because in many cases the envelope sender is
> simply a parsed version of the From: header.
Not really. You can have very odd "From:" lines (with 8bit chars, spaces),
but From is (or should always be) a plain old user@domain string. It's
easier to parse, and probably less prone to error.
RC
--
+-------------------
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica
| Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
| Tel: +351 2 1010 0000 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459
PGP signature
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 27 October 2000 at 15:39:43 -0700
> > > Actually, someone brought this up recently, and I didn't have an explanation
> > > for them -- why does ezmlm subscribe the envelope sender instead of the
> > > address in From: ?
> >
> > My understanding is that the underlying belief is that the envelope
> > sender will be configured invalidly less often. I don't know if
>
> Hmm. Maybe I'm confused. How do people think the envelope sender
> value is determined in the first instant? Eg, how does Eudora go from
> a mail in a window to "Mail From: " in SMTP? Or how does qmail-inject
> for that matter?
Most of us think, if we don't pause to reflect, that the envelope
sender is applied by sendmail or qmail-inject when the mail is
submitted. This weird thing where people read mail on their PCs is
foreign to me, and I tend to overlook it. And in that sort of
environment, envelope sender really *is* less likely to be wrong. But
it's such a small minority these days it hardly matters, in the real
world.
Also, there are a number of institutions and ISPs that insist on their
users relaying through their servers, and they make sure the envelope
sender is valid. This may still be a significant population.
But generally I agree, it would be *much* better to use the from:
header. I've thought about going in to patch it some time, but it
hasn't made it up the priority list.
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
I have installed qmail for the first time and the install has gone extremely
smooth until now. I have run into two problems that I can't seem to solve and
have not been able to find solutions on the list.
My network currently consists of RedHat Linux 6.2 running a P90 server with 64
MB of RAM. This server does not currently have any access to the Internet
since it is being setup for testing purposes only. /etc/resolv.conf is empty
and there is no default gateway set.
The first problem I am having is that I cannot telnet to port 25 on the
server. I will receive the message Connected to 127.0.0.1 Escape Character is
^]. Then, I do not receive any more messages and end up killing the process.
SMTP is defined as being on port 25/tcp in the /etc/services file. Also, I
was able to complete the steps outlined in TEST.delinver and the e-mail was
delivered correctly from what I could tell.
The second problem I have run into is with the pop3 protocol. Again, I was
able to complete the test locally as outlined in Life with qmail. In this
case, I am able to telnet to port 110 on the server without any problems, but
e-mail clients such as Star Office, Outlook, Outlook Express, and Eudora will
not connect. Eudora, prompts for my password and then returns an error
message stating "Connection Timed Out (10060).
Port 110 is defined as pop3 in the /etc/services file and is commented out of
the /etc/inetd.conf file. I am using tcpserver for the pop3 connection and I
am starting it from the qmail startup script.
Following are the commands that I am issuing to tcpserver
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.monea.org
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 | \
/var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d &
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Jay
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 09:19:19AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have installed qmail for the first time and the install has gone
> extremely smooth until now. I have run into two problems that I can't
> seem to solve and have not been able to find solutions on the list.
>
> My network currently consists of RedHat Linux 6.2 running a P90 server
> with 64 MB of RAM. This server does not currently have any access to
> the Internet since it is being setup for testing purposes only.
> /etc/resolv.conf is empty and there is no default gateway set.
So at this point in your testing you have no DNS. Qmail (tcpserver,
really) doesn't read /etc/hosts. You need to use 2 switches on the
tcpserver line to handle this: -H and -l (ell, not one).
The -H switch is necessary to prevent tcpserver from trying to look up
the /sender's/ hostname. The -l is used to set the local host name; that
is, the name of the host that tcpserver is running on, since tcpserver
can't look that up, either.
Finally, a third switch, -R, is used to prevent tcpserver from trying to
retrieve "ident" information (this is the TCPREMOTEINFO mentioned in
various parts of qmail / ucspi-tcp documentation).
Use -H, -R and -l on the tcpserver command-line for qmail-smtpd.
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R -H -lmyhost.nea.org ...
> The first problem I am having is that I cannot telnet to port 25 on
> the server. I will receive the message Connected to 127.0.0.1 Escape
> Character is ^]. Then, I do not receive any more messages and end up
> killing the process.
If you receive the "Escape Character..." message, then you *have*
successfully telnetted to port 25. At that point tcpserver is attempting
to look up, as mentioned above, various things in DNS. The timeouts are
fairly long, so it looks as if nothing's happening.
[snip...]
> The second problem I have run into is with the pop3 protocol. Again,
> I was able to complete the test locally as outlined in Life with
> qmail. In this case, I am able to telnet to port 110 on the server
> without any problems, but e-mail clients such as Star Office, Outlook,
> Outlook Express, and Eudora will not connect. Eudora, prompts for my
> password and then returns an error message stating "Connection Timed
> Out (10060).
Again, tcpserver is trying to do DNS lookups. Use the same three
switches on the tcpserver line that runs qmail-popup.
[snip...]
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Jay
HTH
Tim
--
Timothy Legant
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
hi,
> /etc/resolv.conf is empty
qmail needs dns! it does not look in /etc/hosts.
> SMTP is defined as being on port 25/tcp in the /etc/services file.
how do you start your qmail-smtpd?
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.monea.org
> /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 | \
> /var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d &
to get rid of the timeout use the good old -H switch for tcpserver.
don't know how often i posted that during the last weeks.
what does the archiv say (tm)
;) a
Hello all,
I just tried to compile qmail on Suse 6.4. It stopt on
./compile sig-alarm.c with the following message:
In file included from /usr/include/signal.h:300,
from sig_alarm.c:1:
/usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h:28: asm/sigcontext.h: No such file or directory
make: *** [sig_alarm.o] Error 1
the file sigcontext.h is in that directory but maybe its something
wrong with it? Do you got any ideas?
Thank you very much
Hans-Juergen
Hi Hans-Jürgen,
> wrong with it? Do you got any ideas?
no I don't. I am running qmail under SuSE 6.4. I installed it according
to LWQ.
If you want I can send you my compiled qmail via e-mail which hopefully
runs on your SuSE.
Furthermore you might have a look on Erwin Hoffmanns website for more
information on SuSE Linux & qmail (SuSE does not officially support
qmail but it runs quite well anyway ,-)
bye
/clemens
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 10:43:58AM +0800, Philip Tong wrote:
>What is a good method to allow users to have their mail password changed
>using a Web Browser?
The recent versions of "passwd" on Linux have the ability to change the
password by piping the password in. This means that changing the system
password of a user can be done fairly easily by program.
>What are the security issues that I need to look into?
The typical CGI-sorts of issues you'll need to check for. You know,
like if the user name entered is "jafo;rm -rf /", you probably don't
want to do: system("su root -c 'passwd %s'" % userName)...
Sean
--
"Isn't having a smoking section in a restaurant kind of like having a
peeing section in a swimming pool?" -- David Broadfoot
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
This may be off base, but I normally set the default shell for most
users to be /bin/passwd. Then spawn a telnet process to the local
machine. Once the process is logged on, the process will be prompted
for a new passwd. This is good, because no one needs root permissions
through the web. I use a combination of Perl and expect to make it
work.
Wes
Wesley A. Wannemacher
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Instructor, Network Administrator
University of Northwestern Ohio
http://www.unoh.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Tong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 10:44 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: User password change using web. Suggestions?
>
>
> What is a good method to allow users to have their mail
> password changed
> using a Web Browser?
>
> What are the security issues that I need to look into?
>
> TIA
>
>
Hello,
Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
can't remove the domain of my list of virtual domains because there are more
then 100 valid users to this domain...
The spammer is from USA and I'm from Brazil, I don't known this f...
I really need help!!!
Thanks,
Ari
If your using tcpserver, you should be denying his connection.
If not you should be, you need to check LWQ for a good reference.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ari Arantes Filho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 11:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: SPAM - Help!
Hello,
Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
can't remove the domain of my list of virtual domains because there are more
then 100 valid users to this domain...
The spammer is from USA and I'm from Brazil, I don't known this f...
I really need help!!!
Thanks,
Ari
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:37:42PM -0300, Ari Arantes Filho wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
> write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
> so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
> unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
>
> I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
Welcome to the world of unstoppable spam.
Sorry to say Ari, you cannot stop it consuming some of your resources. I've
had that happen on a site where the spammer sent something like 100K
messages to AOL and about half of them were bogus addresses. Having AOL
consume all your smtp concurrency for a day is not fun.
You'll also probably get some hate mail from people who don't read headers
closely enough and think the spam originated from your site.
I'd be inclined to make the user valid and have their .qmail just be
a comment so that the bounces gets delivered to nowhere. Other than that you
have to sit it out.
Regards.
Tim Hunter wrote:
>
> If your using tcpserver, you should be denying his connection.
>
> If not you should be, you need to check LWQ for a good reference.
>
I think his problem is bigger than that! What I understood was that he's
receiving bounce from lots of the spam destination servers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Se você não encontra
o sentido das coisas
é porque este não
se encontra, se cria.
Antoine Saint-Exupéry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ari Arantes Filho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 11:38 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: SPAM - Help!
>
> Hello,
>
> Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
> write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
> so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
> unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
>
> I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
> can't remove the domain of my list of virtual domains because there are more
> then 100 valid users to this domain...
>
> The spammer is from USA and I'm from Brazil, I don't known this f...
>
> I really need help!!!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ari
Well if he was denying the spammers ip it would stop any incoming mail, for
the mail still in the queue I would setup a .qmail for the "fake" user and
redirect it to /dev/null
Problem solved, well except for contacting the spammers isp.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Augusto Fernandes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:28 PM
To: Tim Hunter
Cc: Ari Arantes Filho; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SPAM - Help!
Tim Hunter wrote:
>
> If your using tcpserver, you should be denying his connection.
>
> If not you should be, you need to check LWQ for a good reference.
>
I think his problem is bigger than that! What I understood was that he's
receiving bounce from lots of the spam destination servers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Se você não encontra
o sentido das coisas
é porque este não
se encontra, se cria.
Antoine Saint-Exupéry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ari Arantes Filho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 11:38 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: SPAM - Help!
>
> Hello,
>
> Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
> write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
> so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
> unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
>
> I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
> can't remove the domain of my list of virtual domains because there are
more
> then 100 valid users to this domain...
>
> The spammer is from USA and I'm from Brazil, I don't known this f...
>
> I really need help!!!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ari
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:37:42PM -0300, Ari Arantes Filho wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
> > write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
> > so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
> > unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
> >
> > I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
>
> Welcome to the world of unstoppable spam.
>
> Sorry to say Ari, you cannot stop it consuming some of your resources. I've
> had that happen on a site where the spammer sent something like 100K
> messages to AOL and about half of them were bogus addresses. Having AOL
> consume all your smtp concurrency for a day is not fun.
>
> You'll also probably get some hate mail from people who don't read headers
> closely enough and think the spam originated from your site.
>
> I'd be inclined to make the user valid and have their .qmail just be
> a comment so that the bounces gets delivered to nowhere. Other than that you
> have to sit it out.
>
> Regards.
Yeah...
Sad! But true!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Se você não encontra
o sentido das coisas
é porque este não
se encontra, se cria.
Antoine Saint-Exupéry
Please, explain us how can tcpserver help in this case.
It is NOT his server which is used for spamming.
Thanks
========= 27/10/00 11:22 by Tim Hunter =========
| If your using tcpserver, you should be denying his connection.
|
| If not you should be, you need to check LWQ for a good reference.
|
--
Mira Tempír <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---[..čekit...]---
http://www.cekit.cz/ ------------ it's all about Internet
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:24:39PM -0400, Tim Hunter wrote:
> Well if he was denying the spammers ip it would stop any incoming mail, for
> the mail still in the queue I would setup a .qmail for the "fake" user and
> redirect it to /dev/null
>
> Problem solved, well except for contacting the spammers isp.
As Daniel said, the problem is that he's getting the bounces because the spammer
forged one of his addresses! So he's trying to stop bounces that are originating
from servers all over the planet (assuming the spammer hit lots of different
domains). You can't stop that with tcpserver as they are legitimate servers that
he normally wants to get email from.
In other words, problem not solved.
Regards.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Augusto Fernandes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:28 PM
> To: Tim Hunter
> Cc: Ari Arantes Filho; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: SPAM - Help!
>
>
> Tim Hunter wrote:
> >
> > If your using tcpserver, you should be denying his connection.
> >
> > If not you should be, you need to check LWQ for a good reference.
> >
>
> I think his problem is bigger than that! What I understood was that he's
> receiving bounce from lots of the spam destination servers.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Se você não encontra
> o sentido das coisas
> é porque este não
> se encontra, se cria.
> Antoine Saint-Exupéry
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ari Arantes Filho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 11:38 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: SPAM - Help!
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
> > write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
> > so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
> > unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
> >
> > I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
> > can't remove the domain of my list of virtual domains because there are
> more
> > then 100 valid users to this domain...
> >
> > The spammer is from USA and I'm from Brazil, I don't known this f...
> >
> > I really need help!!!
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ari
>
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 07:15:28PM +0200, Mira Tempir wrote:
> Please, explain us how can tcpserver help in this case.
> It is NOT his server which is used for spamming.
Someone is mistaken, tcpserver cannot help. Like many things,
only time can fix it.
Regards.
Hi Tim,
> Well if he was denying the spammers ip it would stop any incoming mail,
as I understood this is not a problem at all. The spamer uses a
different smtp server (perhaps his own serer ;-) but fakes the FROM: tag
so that bounces are directed to Ari's mailserver. For short there is no
way to stop the outgoing mail because you do not have access to the
server.
> for
> the mail still in the queue I would setup a .qmail for the "fake" user and
> redirect it to /dev/null
But if there is enough mail to this user this can be a continuing
problem for quite a while.
One way could be to block messages adressed to the user which appers in
the spammers FROM tag. This is theory I do not know how to do this but
perhaps some tcpserver experts know a way to avoid mails for a certain
adress to rech qmail.
/ch
> Problem solved, well except for contacting the spammers isp.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Augusto Fernandes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:28 PM
> To: Tim Hunter
> Cc: Ari Arantes Filho; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: SPAM - Help!
>
> Tim Hunter wrote:
> >
> > If your using tcpserver, you should be denying his connection.
> >
> > If not you should be, you need to check LWQ for a good reference.
> >
>
> I think his problem is bigger than that! What I understood was that he's
> receiving bounce from lots of the spam destination servers.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Se você não encontra
> o sentido das coisas
> é porque este não
> se encontra, se cria.
> Antoine Saint-Exupéry
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ari Arantes Filho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 11:38 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: SPAM - Help!
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
> > write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
> > so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
> > unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
> >
> > I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
> > can't remove the domain of my list of virtual domains because there are
> more
> > then 100 valid users to this domain...
> >
> > The spammer is from USA and I'm from Brazil, I don't known this f...
> >
> > I really need help!!!
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ari
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 08:28:36AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'd be inclined to make the user valid and have their .qmail just be
> a comment so that the bounces gets delivered to nowhere. Other than that you
> have to sit it out.
What I found has helped a lot in this situation are the "badrcptpatterns"
and "badrcptto" patch that are part of the spamcontrol patch available at
http://www.fehcom.de/qmail/qmail_en.html
That already blocks the address at SMTP level and the messages don't
have to go through the queue and the local delivery to get thrown away.
Also saves connection time with your SMTP servers so your tcpserver
slots don't get blocked long and have a higher turnaround time and it
saves a lot of bandwidth.
The bad thing about it is that it generates double bounces at the senders site.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 09:37:37PM +0200, Markus Stumpf wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 08:28:36AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I'd be inclined to make the user valid and have their .qmail just be
> > a comment so that the bounces gets delivered to nowhere. Other than that you
> > have to sit it out.
>
> What I found has helped a lot in this situation are the "badrcptpatterns"
> and "badrcptto" patch that are part of the spamcontrol patch available at
> http://www.fehcom.de/qmail/qmail_en.html
I believe the original poster said that the From: address was randomized
in the user part of the address.
If it's truly random he's stuck, if it's only partially random and
amenable to pattern matching then he has a chance with those patches.
> The bad thing about it is that it generates double bounces at the senders site.
That's true. Everyone loses with spam.
Regards.
Markus Stumpf wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 08:28:36AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I'd be inclined to make the user valid and have their .qmail just be
> > a comment so that the bounces gets delivered to nowhere. Other than that you
> > have to sit it out.
>
> What I found has helped a lot in this situation are the "badrcptpatterns"
> and "badrcptto" patch that are part of the spamcontrol patch available at
> http://www.fehcom.de/qmail/qmail_en.html
> That already blocks the address at SMTP level and the messages don't
> have to go through the queue and the local delivery to get thrown away.
> Also saves connection time with your SMTP servers so your tcpserver
> slots don't get blocked long and have a higher turnaround time and it
> saves a lot of bandwidth.
> The bad thing about it is that it generates double bounces at the senders site.
>
Hey man!
It seems to be a great thing!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Se você não encontra
o sentido das coisas
é porque este não
se encontra, se cria.
Antoine Saint-Exupéry
hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:24:39PM -0400, Tim Hunter wrote:
> > Well if he was denying the spammers ip it would stop any incoming mail, for
> > the mail still in the queue I would setup a .qmail for the "fake" user and
> > redirect it to /dev/null
> >
> > Problem solved, well except for contacting the spammers isp.
>
> As Daniel said, the problem is that he's getting the bounces because the spammer
> forged one of his addresses! So he's trying to stop bounces that are originating
> from servers all over the planet (assuming the spammer hit lots of different
> domains). You can't stop that with tcpserver as they are legitimate servers that
> he normally wants to get email from.
>
> In other words, problem not solved.
>
there is a 'badrcptto'-patch on www.qmail.org
this will solve the problem on aris server. but... then he will bomb
postmasteraccounts on other servers. not the best solution for the net.
only cuting of the open relay and hang the admin of this server will solve
this situation.
cu
micha
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daniel Augusto Fernandes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:28 PM
> > To: Tim Hunter
> > Cc: Ari Arantes Filho; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: SPAM - Help!
> >
> >
> > Tim Hunter wrote:
> > >
> > > If your using tcpserver, you should be denying his connection.
> > >
> > > If not you should be, you need to check LWQ for a good reference.
> > >
> >
> > I think his problem is bigger than that! What I understood was that he's
> > receiving bounce from lots of the spam destination servers.
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Se você não encontra
> > o sentido das coisas
> > é porque este não
> > se encontra, se cria.
> > Antoine Saint-Exupéry
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ari Arantes Filho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 11:38 AM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: SPAM - Help!
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Someone is using another smtp server to send a very big spam, but they
> > > write the header with FROM = an unknown user of one of my virtual domains,
> > > so postmasters keep sending bounce messages or autoresponders to this
> > > unknown user and my postmaster is receving more than 10000 emails.
> > >
> > > I've temporary created this unknows user, but how can I stop this? I
> > > can't remove the domain of my list of virtual domains because there are
> > more
> > > then 100 valid users to this domain...
> > >
> > > The spammer is from USA and I'm from Brazil, I don't known this f...
> > >
> > > I really need help!!!
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Ari
> >
>> Crap. I just released a new version of it yesterday. Hmmm. That must
>> mean you're the only person using this feature. Shows how really useful
>> it is. I'll apply the fix to the next release.
I've had to use it in the past as well, though I haven't done so with
Bruce's RPM. Basicly it's used mostly in a "because the users want
it that way" situation.
>Side note: Could you please stick a README into the RPM detailing which
>patches are applied and what they do, ie. how your RPM differs from the
>"pristine" QMail ?
Not a bad idea. Are you volunteering to write it? ;-)
Sean
--
A smart terminal is not a smart*ass* terminal, but rather a terminal
you can educate. -- Rob Pike
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 05:28:28PM +0200, Goran Blazic wrote:
[snip]
> I actually do call this an error... ;-)
You are very much free to implement your own locking. That shouldn't be
too hard either.
Greetz, Peter
--
dataloss networks
'/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
'Het leven is een stuiterbal, maar de mijne plakt aan t plafond!' - me
Hi All,
Is there a seamless drop-in email virus scanner program which
will work with qmail v1.03, tcpserver, vpopmail, and qmailadmin packages
installed on my system, one system in here got munched by the love bug
virus. Any ideas, my mail system works nicely, but don't want to have
to install a lot of patches to get something like this working.
-Bill
>>>>> "Bill" == Bill Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bill> Hi All, Is there a seamless drop-in email virus scanner program
Bill> which will work with qmail v1.03, tcpserver, vpopmail, and
Bill> qmailadmin packages installed on my system, one system in here
Bill> got munched by the love bug virus. Any ideas, my mail system
Bill> works nicely, but don't want to have to install a lot of
Bill> patches to get something like this working.
There are links to virus products at www.qmail.org - they are your
best bet. Will take a little effort, but if you can't afford security,
you can't afford to have important data (well, close enough :)
--
"Bubble Memory, n.: A derogatory term, usually referring to a person's
intelligence. See also vacuum tube."
- The Devil's Dictionary to Computer Studies
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 09:03:41AM -0700, Bill Parker wrote:
> Is there a seamless drop-in email virus scanner program which
> will work with qmail v1.03, tcpserver, vpopmail, and qmailadmin packages
> installed on my system, one system in here got munched by the love bug
> virus. Any ideas, my mail system works nicely, but don't want to have
> to install a lot of patches to get something like this working.
---end quoted text---
I'm using Jason Haar's Qmail-Scanner here. you can check it out at
http://qmail-scanner.sourceforge.net/
There's also a couple others listed at www.qmail.org that you might want to take a
look at.
--
Brian Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
"Bloody instructions which, being learned, return to plague the inventor."
-Shakespeare, on debugging
[Macbeth, Act 1, Scene 7]
* Bill Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a seamless drop-in email virus scanner program which will
> work with qmail v1.03, tcpserver, vpopmail, and qmailadmin packages
> installed on my system,
http://qmail.org/top.html, look for AMaVis and similar products.
> one system in here got munched by the love bug virus. Any ideas, my
> mail system works nicely, but don't want to have to install a lot of
> patches to get something like this working.
"Virus filtering" is matter of policy. I believe in restrictive
/content/ filtering (nothing that says "Microsoft" comes anywhere near
one of our remaining Wintendos, the content is diverted to a central
Linux sandbox running StarOffice) in connection with draconic punishment
for attempts at undermining this policy. Once you've fired the first one
or two people trying to open "some really neat PowerPoint slides my
girlfriend sent me from University" or "a rilly, rilly important Word
document from some K3wL info site in Romania", people will believe that
an AUP is not to be violated. Also, educate your users. Take an old box
and show them why MS software is dangerous.
One of these days, someone will build a shotgun API for qmfilt, and all
will be well.
--
Robin S. Socha <http://socha.net/>
Are you people sending mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] from your
signed e-mail addresses?
You should look at the mail header of this message and see what's your
address. The very first (mostly) is something like this:
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Which means I'm subscribed to qmail list as [EMAIL PROTECTED] So I
should send mailing list request as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try it and you'll need no administrator/listmaster help.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Se você não encontra
o sentido das coisas
é porque este não
se encontra, se cria.
Antoine Saint-Exupéry
Are you people sending mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] from your
signed e-mail addresses?
You should look at the mail header of this message and see what's your
address. The very first (mostly) is something like this:
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Which means I'm subscribed to qmail list as [EMAIL PROTECTED] So I
should send mailing list request as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try it and you'll need no administrator/listmaster help.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Se você não encontra
o sentido das coisas
é porque este não
se encontra, se cria.
Antoine Saint-Exupéry
> .
> .
> .
Well, it seems that the server running the mailing list is very busy
too.
So you'll have to be patient.
That's why we now have two messages of mine regarding this.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCSNet http://www.gcsnet.com.br/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Se você não encontra
o sentido das coisas
é porque este não
se encontra, se cria.
Antoine Saint-Exupéry
Tue, 24 Oct 2000 15:46:16 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In !qmail Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted ...
[Queuing outgoing PPP mail to multiple ISPs]
>But this is what ISP SMTP relays are _for_.
I know and suppose that is why it doesn't appear in the FAQs, etc.
However it may be desirable for company A (who owns the system running
qmail) not to appear in messages from a related company B using the same
server (no big secret that's just they way they'd like it to be).
>qmail will let you override
>the default routing of messages based on the domain part of the destionation
>address with smtproutes, but I've never seen any patches to allow what
>you describe above.
Having played a bit it seems to me that preline and a short script using
maildir / safecat will achieve my end (I'll need to tidy up some of the
header re-writing but it works).
>The only way I can think of is to have multiple qmail installations
[snip]
Thanks for your input. It made me think "there must be a simpler way"
and there is. I'm a little disappointed qmail couldn't do this without
a script ... maybe I'm the only person that ever had someone ask for
this.
--
Wm ...
Sometimes we have our mail server busy sending out a lot of newsletters. While
it's doing that any other mail sent through the server has to wait in the
queue. Is there any way to tell qmail that some messages should be processed
and sent before others? Thanks.
=====
Greg Jorgensen
Deschooling Society
Portland, Oregon, USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/
We send lots of newsletters and other subscription-type emails. Our qmail
server seems to max out at 10,000 outbound messages per hour. I already have
concurrencyremote set to 120, and reverse DNS lookups and other slowdowns
turned off. The CPU (a dual UltraSparc) is not maxing out; it looks like we've
reached a limit of the SMTP protocol and the number of connections allowed.
I can see that separating outbound and incoming mail on different servers would
help; most of the bounces come in while the bulk of the subscriptions are going
out. We are going to add some servers, but I'm wondering if 10,000/hour is a
typical limit, or is there some way I can send more messages in an hour?
Thanks!
=====
Greg Jorgensen
Deschooling Society
Portland, Oregon, USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 01:43:42PM -0700, Greg Jorgensen wrote:
> We send lots of newsletters and other subscription-type emails. Our qmail
> server seems to max out at 10,000 outbound messages per hour. I already have
> concurrencyremote set to 120, and reverse DNS lookups and other slowdowns
> turned off. The CPU (a dual UltraSparc) is not maxing out; it looks like we've
> reached a limit of the SMTP protocol and the number of connections allowed.
>
> I can see that separating outbound and incoming mail on different servers would
> help; most of the bounces come in while the bulk of the subscriptions are going
> out. We are going to add some servers, but I'm wondering if 10,000/hour is a
> typical limit, or is there some way I can send more messages in an hour?
There is no typical limit, actually.
Your limit will entirely depend on you h/w, os, network, mail profile, target
proximity profile, and more. And no two setups are the same.
Before working out what to change, you need to find out what is limiting
your thruput. If any one of your resources apart from concurrency is
fully utilized, then you need to identify it and increas it. That's most
likely to be disk i/o, but possibly, memory.
If all resources are still plentiful, then you'll want to look into
increasing your remote concurrency up to the real maximum of 255 which
requires changing conf-spawn in the source and recompiling and installing.
When you're running at 255 remotes at a time, review the situation.
Regards.
The reason it's so slow is a large number of the connections are most likely
being tied up for long periods by mailservers than don't respond. About 80
of my 120 connections when I sent out mailings would do the same thing.
Apply the big concurrency patch. My concurrency is at 508 now, and I can do
millions of messages per day. During sending, about 100-120 of the
connections are tied up by slow or nonresponding mailservers.
I'd raise my concurrency higher, but I have to make some kernel mods first
(FD_SET problem).
Jay
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Jorgensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 3:44 PM
> To: qmail
> Subject: How many outbound messages can you send per hour?
>
>
> We send lots of newsletters and other subscription-type
> emails. Our qmail
> server seems to max out at 10,000 outbound messages per hour.
> I already have
> concurrencyremote set to 120, and reverse DNS lookups and
> other slowdowns
> turned off. The CPU (a dual UltraSparc) is not maxing out; it
> looks like we've
> reached a limit of the SMTP protocol and the number of
> connections allowed.
>
> I can see that separating outbound and incoming mail on
> different servers would
> help; most of the bounces come in while the bulk of the
> subscriptions are going
> out. We are going to add some servers, but I'm wondering if
> 10,000/hour is a
> typical limit, or is there some way I can send more messages
> in an hour?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> =====
> Greg Jorgensen
> Deschooling Society
> Portland, Oregon, USA
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
> http://im.yahoo.com/
>
Hello all,
Anyone know if it's possible to do per user RBL/RSS spam checks? I.e..
something out of .qmail maybe?
-j
---
Robert J. Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.siscom.net
Looking to outsource news? http://www.newshosting.com
SISCOM Network Administration - President, SISCOM Inc.
Phone: 937-222-8150 FAX: 937-222-8153
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 05:01:21PM -0400, Robert J. Adams wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Anyone know if it's possible to do per user RBL/RSS spam checks? I.e..
> something out of .qmail maybe?
Search for rblchk. It's a cute little perl script which you can use with
procmail or maildrop.
RC
--
+-------------------
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica
| Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
| Tel: +351 2 1010 0000 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459
PGP signature
guys,
just a quick question. when qmail recieves mail, does it immediately try to
send it out w/o putting it on the queue? or does it ALWAYS put it in the
queue and have some other process pick it up for delivery?
-marlon
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 02:37:42PM -0700, marlon abao (TS-US) wrote:
> guys,
>
> just a quick question. when qmail recieves mail, does it immediately try to
> send it out w/o putting it on the queue? or does it ALWAYS put it in the
> queue and have some other process pick it up for delivery?
It always goes in the queue. Consider what would happen if the system
crashed half way thru a delivery that didn't go via the queue. The message
would be lost and qmail promises not to lose messages.
Regards.
I have noticed that it is possible to send infected messages
with sqwebmail running qmail-scanner.
I guess sqwebmail put messages directly in the queue, so it
no qmail-smptd is called and no antivirus is used.
The only solution I could find is reverting to Amavis.
Amavis is bit harder to setup and maintain, and I always
prefered qmail-scanner, even being a lot slower and more resource
consuming. Now Amavis is the only option.
Some ideia?
Thus said [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:26:33 GMT:
> I have noticed that it is possible to send infected messages
> with sqwebmail running qmail-scanner.
> I guess sqwebmail put messages directly in the queue, so it
> no qmail-smptd is called and no antivirus is used.
I don't see how you could do this with sqwebmail unless you are
forwarding on messages that someone sent you. I am not aware of any
email *virus* for sqwebmail and you most certainly won't be sending one
out with it when you simply hit "Create message" As far as I know, it
is not susceptible to the strain of kiddie *virus* that most
Microsludge mailers are. :-)
Andy
--
[-----------[system uptime]--------------------------------------------]
7:11pm up 20 days, 22:38, 4 users, load average: 1.33, 1.22, 1.21
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> I have noticed that it is possible to send infected messages
> with sqwebmail running qmail-scanner.
> I guess sqwebmail put messages directly in the queue, so it
> no qmail-smptd is called and no antivirus is used.
>
> The only solution I could find is reverting to Amavis.
> Amavis is bit harder to setup and maintain, and I always
> prefered qmail-scanner, even being a lot slower and more resource
> consuming. Now Amavis is the only option.
>
> Some ideia?
Sqwebmail uses a script called sendit.sh, that calls qmail-inject for
sending the mail. If you have applied the QMAILQUEUE patch, than you have
to tell qmail-inject to use that.
In the sendit.sh:
Apply export QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl" before
qmail-inject.
Or you could also do as I've done, applied the QMAILQUEUE variable in the
httpd.conf file.
SetEnv QMAILQUEUE /var/qmail/bin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl
regards,
eibo
I manually set up q-mail on my Linux Mandrake (7.1) workstation a few
weeks ago in order to send out emails from my computer on a dialup ppp
connection.
Every time I try to send a message, I get the following error:
Oct 27 09:58:46 localhost qmail: 972665926.585538 new msg 408214
Oct 27 09:58:46 localhost qmail: 972665926.586693 info msg 408214: bytes
219 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 932 uid 0
Oct 27 09:58:46 localhost qmail: 972665926.637301 starting delivery 1:
msg 408214 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oct 27 09:58:46 localhost qmail: 972665926.637376 status: local 0/10
remote 1/20
Oct 27 09:58:57 localhost qmail: 972665937.713745 delivery 1: deferral:
Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/
Oct 27 09:58:57 localhost qmail: 972665937.713862 status: local 0/10
remote 0/20
I haven't been very successful in finding this problem addressed in the
documentation, so I was wondering if somebody can give me a hand in
fixing it??
Thanks,
Noah Lively
Hi there,
Suppose Qmail cannot send an email for a user, so it will send back a
message to the user telling her (or him) that that message cannot be
delivered. How can I customize the returned message so that a
non-English speaking user can know what has happened clearly.
BTW, is there any effort to provide localized Qmail package for
non-English speaking users? I mean, if there are some such efforts,
Qmail will be expected to have more widespread use.
Thank you,
w.y.
I've walked through the lwq file and was pretty happy with my progress untill
it came to power up the program by "/etc/rc.d/qmail start" . Then a repeated
error message fills up that terminal like this :
supervise: fatal: unable to start log/run: file does not exist
supervise: fatal: unable to start log/run: file does not exist
supervise: fatal: unable to start log/run: file does not exist
And the only way to stop is to type in the command "/etc/rc.d/qmail stop"
blindly, because I could not see the command I yped in as the creen is
flood with the error message above. After typing that, this appears:
Stopping qmail: svscan qmail logging.
When it complains on saying that log/run doesnt not exist, I am assuming it is
talking about /var/qmail/supervise/log/run as the startup script (
/etc/rc.d/qmail ) does "cd /var/qmail/supervise" at startup, effectively making
/var/qmail/supervise the root directory for anything executed in the script.
It is true log/run does not exist, but as far as lwq is concerned, it did not
need to, unless I missed something in the howto, if so, please
point out. But as far as I can see, I dont need log/run from the root
directory ( /var/qmail/supervise ) , but from qmail-send and qmail-smtpd which
already has log/run within them.
If anyone could give me an insight into this perticular problem I would be very
appreciative. Thanks in advance.
regards
chris
I'm calling
tcpserver with this line:
tcpserver -q -c 500
-x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3
&
I need to use
fixcrio to fix stupid emailers that put stray <lf>'s in their
messages. How do I integrate fixcrio into this? Do I just
do:
tcpserver -q -c 500
-x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp
/usr/local/bin/fixcrio | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 |
/var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
Jay
Hi all
can anybody tell me how can i apply qmail-queue patch on existing running
qmail-1.03, qmail patch ois available on qmail.org site but i don't know
how to aply that , bcoz its neither a tar file nor a rpm,
So could u pl help me in applying that
regards
lokesh
