qmail Digest 25 Apr 2001 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1345
Topics (messages 61327 through 61387):
qmail-pop3d not handling enough messages
61327 by: Thomas Ackermann
61342 by: Uwe Ohse
User Masqurading
61328 by: David Hunt
forwarding to more than one mailbox ?
61329 by: Frédéric Beléteau
It's not my list but ... (AV Bots)
61330 by: Bruno Wolff III
61333 by: Brett Randall
61335 by: Robin S. Socha
61344 by: Karsten W. Rohrbach
61348 by: Todd Finney
61353 by: Andy Bradford
61358 by: Bruno Wolff III
61361 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
61363 by: Todd Finney
Ban These Exchange Server Users
61331 by: Robert Mudryk
61334 by: Russ Allbery
61338 by: Brett Randall
61349 by: Ruprecht Helms
61351 by: Alex Pennace
61354 by: Uwe Ohse
61355 by: Henning Brauer
61356 by: Robin S. Socha
61357 by: Andy Bradford
61362 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
61385 by: Csaba Bobak
Re: .qmail alias file with an underscore in the entry...
61332 by: Cleo Macy
61337 by: Charles Cazabon
61343 by: Cleo Macy
Re: CAN'T Send to lists!
61336 by: Charles Cazabon
61372 by: Marco Calistri
61373 by: Marco Calistri
Re: questions about an exploit
61339 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: qmail-pop3d not working?
61340 by: Steven Katz
61341 by: Charles Cazabon
61384 by: Rick Updegrove
issue receiving email
61345 by: Robert Lech
ezmlm-idx? (was: ScanMail Message: To Recipient virus found and action taken.)
61346 by: Robin S. Socha
Re: Vulnerable MUAs ...
61347 by: Robin S. Socha
61350 by: David Talkington
61381 by: Karsten W. Rohrbach
Re: how to _delay_ failed authentication
61352 by: Markus Stumpf
61382 by: Karsten W. Rohrbach
61383 by: Kittiwat Manosuthi
Attach
61359 by: Alexandre Gonçalves Jacarandá
61360 by: Charles Cazabon
timeout downloading mail while connecting to the server using dial-up
61364 by: Christian Dressend
61365 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: incorrect_user@correct_domain accepted
61366 by: Ketan Bajaj
qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux
61367 by: hongtao
61369 by: alexus
61374 by: Wagner Teixeira
RSS LIST
61368 by: hongtao
61370 by: Charles Cazabon
61371 by: Tim Hunter
61375 by: hongtao
61386 by: Johan Almqvist
Re: issues receiving email
61376 by: Robert Lech
61377 by: Tim Hunter
Just a little question
61378 by: Travis Turner
61379 by: Tim Legant
61380 by: Travis Turner
Sqwebmail
61387 by: Pablo Buenaventura
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
hy!
i've gat a qmail-system with vpopmail, using the qmail-pop3d as popper.
my problem is, that the number of messages in my cur grew up to 23240
and now i cant get them anymore, the pop3d gives out an error like cant
change to $Home/Maildir..
anyone help?
thx
thomas
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:44:32PM +0000, Thomas Ackermann wrote:
> i've gat a qmail-system with vpopmail, using the qmail-pop3d as popper.
> my problem is, that the number of messages in my cur grew up to 23240
> and now i cant get them anymore, the pop3d gives out an error like cant
> change to $Home/Maildir..
You mean "-ERR unable to scan $HOME/Maildir", right?
Oh, well. It's been a year, so i might just repeat it completely. See
below.
I don't remember getting feedback whether the suggested change to
prioq.c really made a difference.
"the adjust your resource limit" is done with softlimit, if you
use daemontools.
Regards, Uwe
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:20:01 +0000
From: Uwe Ohse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Gary Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: qmail-pop3 problems with 'large' accounts
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 09:25:26AM -0800
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 09:25:26AM -0800, Gary Richardson wrote:
> I'm having problems with a pop user checking their. There are around
> 12000 emails in their MailDir directory and I get the following error when I
> try to download them:
>
> -ERR unable to scan $HOME/Maildir
> Connection closed by foreign host.
out of memory. qmail-pop3d needs space for 12000 filenames, with maybe
30 characters each (depending on the length of the hostname part of
the file name), plus 5 ("new/\0"), plus another 8 bytes for meta
information, accounting for about 500000 bytes of memory, plus
whatever your C library needs, plus whatever the kernel needs.
Unfortunately qmail-pop3d suffers from memory fragmentation, so
the actual memory usage is somewhat higher.
You might get a far better behaviour if you change the number 100 in the
line
GEN_ALLOC_readyplus(prioq,struct prioq_elt,p,len,a,i,n,x,100,prioq_readyplus)
in prioq.c to, say, 5000, and recompile qmail-pop3d, and install that
and only that - the change will eat 5000*8 bytes in qmail-send.
Or: Adjust your resource limits.
Or: clean up your mail dir. pop3 wasn't designed to deal with that
number of messages anyway (as wasn't maildir).
Regards, Uwe
Is it possible to masqurade users like this
root@my_private_domain -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
only when the email goes outside of my private domain that is non registered?
I'm using qmail-1.03. I want emails within my domain to not be masquraded. I would
want qmail mail to do this not my email client.
Is this possible? I haven't seen any documentation that describes how
to do this.
Thanks
Hi,
i have a qmail installation with vpopmail + sqwebmail + qmailadmin working
now,
i would like to forward to more than one mailbox at the same time...
is there any possibilities in qmailadmin ?
i found a way to do that by adding a dot qmail file in the user directory
and adding some & + forward e-mail address in it. I have tried it yet, am i
alright ?
Thanks.
Fred.
It isn't my list, but if it was I would add the IP addresses of any servers
that sent a virus warning to my list into my tcp rules block list.
>>>>> "Bruno" == Bruno Wolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It isn't my list, but if it was I would add the IP addresses of any servers
> that sent a virus warning to my list into my tcp rules block list.
Or simply strip the attachments to any messages... That'd be my ideal
choice. Keep the list relatively text-only (HTML to some degree), have
no virii problems and keep total bandwidth usage down. Overheads are
obvious, but at least for each e-mail to the list, the attachment
would just have to be stripped when it arrived (a relatively simple
Perl script could do it, or a compiled C program if you're after
efficiency). I think this overhead is minor compared to the headache
of virii warnings over the last couple of days (thank God for Gnus
scoring :)
--
^X^C
q
quit
:q
^C
end
x
exit
ZZ
^D
^Z
^K^B
?
help
* Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010424 09:31]:
> It isn't my list, but if it was I would add the IP addresses of any servers
> that sent a virus warning to my list into my tcp rules block list.
Well, this one "feature" in Windows has created more traffic than qmail
over the last 24h. Anyway, your suggestion is wrong. If the admin of a
central mailserver is
a) stupid enough to run Windows
b) stupid enough to use a virus scanner
c) stupid enough to run a misconfigured mail notificication
we have a clear case of MCSE, but that's no reason to punish the users
of that server.
Again: the problem is on the server side (i.e. "administrators" running
Exchange on Win2k or whatever the the lates hype is) here, not on the
users'.
--
Robin S. Socha
http://my.gnus.org/ - To boldly frobnicate what no newbie has grokked before.
Robin S. Socha([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.04.24 09:59:25 +0000:
> we have a clear case of MCSE, but that's no reason to punish the users
> of that server.
MCSE = management can't send email (?)
;-)
>
> Again: the problem is on the server side (i.e. "administrators" running
> Exchange on Win2k or whatever the the lates hype is) here, not on the
> users'.
yup, but software that sends mail on it's own behalf to arbitrary
adresses is considered broken and therefor has to be removed. ah, yes,
there actually is an application for actually using exchange (imho the
only one): X.400 based messaging services for legacy backend networks.
/k
--
> The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour
> to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores
> the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them
> into it in the first place. -- Douglas Adams in Guardian, August 25, 1995
KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de
[Key] [KeyID---] [Created-] [Fingerprint-------------------------------------]
GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46
At 09:54 AM 4/24/01, Brett Randall wrote:
>Or simply strip the attachments to any messages... That'd be my ideal
>choice. Keep the list relatively text-only (HTML to some degree), have
>no virii problems and keep total bandwidth usage down. Overheads are
>obvious, but at least for each e-mail to the list, the attachment
>would just have to be stripped when it arrived (a relatively simple
>Perl script could do it, or a compiled C program if you're after
>efficiency).
On an ezmlm list, stripping MIME attachments is as simple as saying
'Hey, don't let any MIME attachments through'. Stripping uuencoded
attachments is equally simple - you just add
|/usr/bin/uudecode -o /dev/stdout >/dev/null 2>&1 && { echo
"Attachments Prohibi
ted"; exit 100; }; exit 0
to DIR/editor.
I'm not sure what kind of overhead this generates, but we host several
lists that all have volumes equal to or greater than this list, and
I've never noticed a problem.
Setting a maximum message size helps also. That's probably not a good
idea on a tech list, though, as messages including debugging
information can be rather long sometimes.
The real answer, of course, is "lose Outlook, and stop double-clicking
things", but I suppose we're ignoring that for the purposes of this
discussion.
Todd
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:35:10 CDT, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> It isn't my list, but if it was I would add the IP addresses of any servers
> that sent a virus warning to my list into my tcp rules block list.
Unfortunately that won't work. The email is sent to a list exploder
and never directly delivered to your mail server. So, this would only
be useful on the list server. :-)
Andy
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:51:02AM -0600,
Andy Bradford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:35:10 CDT, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
> > It isn't my list, but if it was I would add the IP addresses of any servers
> > that sent a virus warning to my list into my tcp rules block list.
>
> Unfortunately that won't work. The email is sent to a list exploder
> and never directly delivered to your mail server. So, this would only
> be useful on the list server. :-)
That is what I was suggesting. DJB can see what server sent the virus
warning messages to the list and block further messages of any kind
from being injected from that server.
I don't agree that blocking the server is unacceptable because it punishes
people forced to use that server. For one thing, people may be using a
different server to send mail to the list than the server sending the
virus warnings.
I don't know that blocking attachments on this list is a great idea.
It may be reasonable to send small examples to the list as attachments
rather than asking people to go to a web site to see them. Also, not
including attachments isn't a guarenty that some virus scanner won't
like the subject of your message or find some other reason to send a
message to the sender and all recipients of a message.
Todd Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On an ezmlm list, stripping MIME attachments is as simple as ...
To be exact: that's only possible with ezmlm-idx.
Regards, Frank
At 03:44 PM 4/24/01, Frank Tegtmeyer wrote:
>Todd Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On an ezmlm list, stripping MIME attachments is as simple as ...
>
>To be exact: that's only possible with ezmlm-idx.
Yes, my bad.
Todd
If you noticed, all the Virii Reject Messages are from Exchange
Servers... QMAIL anti-Virus Scanning like qmail-scanner says [This
message was _not_ sent to the originator, as they appear to be a
mailing-list or other automated Email message]
I know you all are so against it... but don't you think it's time to
re-consider installing a scanner on Mailing Lists? probably would have
saved a GB of traffic yesterday and today... I could see this as a
Denial of Service Attack against a mailing list.. bombing it with
viruses to watch all the subscribers reject all the viruses
Robert Mudryk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you noticed, all the Virii Reject Messages are from Exchange
> Servers... QMAIL anti-Virus Scanning like qmail-scanner says [This
> message was _not_ sent to the originator, as they appear to be a
> mailing-list or other automated Email message]
> I know you all are so against it... but don't you think it's time to
> re-consider installing a scanner on Mailing Lists?
No, I think it's time to kick everyone running one of those broken
scanners that mails the mailing list off of the mailing list.
> I could see this as a Denial of Service Attack against a mailing list..
> bombing it with viruses to watch all the subscribers reject all the
> viruses
Good reason to remove every person using such a scanner from the mailing
list.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
>>>>> "Russ" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Robert Mudryk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> If you noticed, all the Virii Reject Messages are from Exchange
>> Servers... QMAIL anti-Virus Scanning like qmail-scanner says [This
>> message was _not_ sent to the originator, as they appear to be a
>> mailing-list or other automated Email message]
>> I know you all are so against it... but don't you think it's time to
>> re-consider installing a scanner on Mailing Lists?
> No, I think it's time to kick everyone running one of those broken
> scanners that mails the mailing list off of the mailing list.
While this might serve as a deterrent for some users, most are smart
enough to realise that all they have to do is re-subscribe. Most
people run their own servers, so they can just as easily add their own
new account for the list. Sure, we can ban a whole domain, but there
are nicer ways to be a Nazi than this...
--
"Microsoft Works."
- Oxymoron
Hi,
I have trouble understanding that you mean.
>..., but there
>are nicer ways to be a Nazi than this...
Sorry but this seems for my you are thinking not bad over rassism and the
things, that were done in the time from 1993 to 1945.
If it is so, this mailinglist is the wrong place to say such things. In
germany the isp have to cancel the internetconnection from a user if the
hear that the user is providing neonazistic stuff and postings that
contains material like that.
Regards,
Ruprecht
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 06:50:30PM +0200, Ruprecht Helms wrote:
[Brett's comments about being "Nazi" towards retarded mail servers and
their users]
> Sorry but this seems for my you are thinking not bad over rassism and the
> things, that were done in the time from 1993 to 1945.
>
> If it is so, this mailinglist is the wrong place to say such things. In
> germany the isp have to cancel the internetconnection from a user if the
> hear that the user is providing neonazistic stuff and postings that
> contains material like that.
Luckily [EMAIL PROTECTED] and Brett Randall aren't in Germany, and
don't have to contend with such drastic restrictions of expression.
That being said, he was talking about Nazi-like actions, not Nazis
themselves.
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 06:50:52PM +0200, Ruprecht Helms wrote:
> If it is so, this mailinglist is the wrong place to say such things. In
> germany the isp have to cancel the internetconnection from a user if the
> hear that the user is providing neonazistic stuff and postings that
> contains material like that.
Ähhh ... no. Not even close.
Even germans may discuss about nazis. And even german ISPs don't cancel
accounts "if they hear that ...".
Please stop spreading misinformation.
And please stop partitiating in discussings in which somebody refered
to nazis if these discussions aren't about nazis. It's common knowledge
that anybody who reaches that level will have his karma reduced to 0
and will receive all the misfortune he deserves. Apart from that he'll
be killfiled.
Regards, Uwe (working for a german ISP)
P.S.: regarding $subject: sounds tempting
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:44:23PM -0400, Alex Pennace wrote:
> Luckily [EMAIL PROTECTED] and Brett Randall aren't in Germany, and
> don't have to contend with such drastic restrictions of expression.
There aren't. we have to make websites unavailable once we get informed that
they are violating german law (and they really do). Using Nazi-symbols or
telling people KZ's weren't existing are against laws, for example. Most
providers in germany ar explicitely stating they won't host any nazi-stuff,
and that's good IMHO. We don't need to make people using the word nazi or
something like that disconnected or so. And that's also good IMHO.
Ruprecht just didn't get the meaning right.
But that's _far_ OT, so let's stop the discussion.
--
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
http://www.bsws.de | Germany
* Ruprecht Helms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi, I have trouble understanding that you mean.
No. You are trying to be a particularly Good German(tm). The only thing
more embarrassing than a Funny German is quite possibly a Good German,
though.
>> ..., but there are nicer ways to be a Nazi than this...
> Sorry but this seems for my you are thinking not bad over rassism and
> the things, that were done in the time from 1993 to 1945.
Get a life, tree-hugger:
http://www.tuxedo.org/jargon/html/entry/fascist.html
> If it is so, this mailinglist is the wrong place to say such
> things. In germany the isp have to cancel the internetconnection from
> a user if the hear that the user is providing neonazistic stuff and
> postings that contains material like that.
Don't meddle in the affairs of wiza^Wpolitical scientists, Ruprecht. You
are wrong, and - what's worse - you know it. But, eh, you kinda invoked
Godwin, and that's good.
--
Robin S. Socha
http://my.gnus.org/ - To boldly frobnicate what no newbie has grokked before.
On 24 Apr 2001 06:57:45 PDT, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I know you all are so against it... but don't you think it's time to
> > re-consider installing a scanner on Mailing Lists?
>
> No, I think it's time to kick everyone running one of those broken
> scanners that mails the mailing list off of the mailing list.
Maybe it's time subscriber-only posting was enabled. :-) All of this
would have been prevented in this case because non of the AV addresses
are subscribers.
Andy
Ruprecht Helms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have trouble understanding that you mean.
Then don't write such nonsense.
Frank
(also from Germany)
Hi,
we have an expression for your case here in Hungary which could be
translated as
"if it is not your shirt, do not wear it"
I am sure that Brett (Brett Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) did not
mean anything wrong, he just wanted to express the dark side of banning
someone who is not responsible for this long-spoke spam.
Csaba
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 2001.04.24, 18:50:52, Ruprecht Helms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
regarding Re: Ban These Exchange Server Users:
> Hi,
> I have trouble understanding that you mean.
> >..., but there
> >are nicer ways to be a Nazi than this...
> Sorry but this seems for my you are thinking not bad over rassism and the
> things, that were done in the time from 1993 to 1945.
> If it is so, this mailinglist is the wrong place to say such things. In
> germany the isp have to cancel the internetconnection from a user if the
> hear that the user is providing neonazistic stuff and postings that
> contains material like that.
> Regards,
> Ruprecht
> __________
> This message went through virus scan at Trend Ltd. which stated
> the message was clean of viri appeared before 2001.04.18.
__________
This message went through virus scan at Trend Ltd. which stated
the message was clean of viri appeared before 2001.04.18.
I have taken a look at my maillog and strangely enough, I do get a
report that the delivery proceeded without any problems. Yet I never
get the email... BUT if I try sending an email directly to the Hotmail
address using pine (sending it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead of
root@ for example), the message gets there OK (the maillog for both
methods are identical, though).
I guess it might be a Hotmail problem or something. I will try to open
an webmail account with another provider to see if I get the same
behavior.
Thanks anyway!
-Cleo
> Have you tried prefixing the email address with & to make sure qmail
knows
> it's an email address to forward to?
>
> Can you post logs of what happens when you try emailing root@?
>
> __________________
> Chris Bolt
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.bolt.cx
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cleo Macy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 8:33 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: .qmail alias file with an underscore in the entry...
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I've looked in the qmail FAQ but have not found an answer to my
> question. I hope someone out there can help me.
>
> I have tried creating an alias for the root user on my FreeBSD system,
> but have noticed that if I put an email address with an underscore in
> it, such as "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", in the /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-
> root file, the mail never gets forwarded to that address. But the
> forwarding seems to works fine with any other address that doesn't
> contain an underscore.
>
> Is this a limitation of the qmail alias mechanism? If so, is there a
> workaround? If not, what am I doing wrong?
>
> Thanks!
> -Cleo
>
>
>
Cleo Macy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have taken a look at my maillog and strangely enough, I do get a
> report that the delivery proceeded without any problems. Yet I never
> get the email... BUT if I try sending an email directly to the Hotmail
> address using pine (sending it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead of
> root@ for example), the message gets there OK (the maillog for both
> methods are identical, though).
It's the Hotmail "Inbox protector" feature. If you send mail directly to a
Hotmail address with your MUA, the recipient's address shows up in both the
envelope, and in the headers of the message (in the To: or cc: header).
If instead you have a forward directive going to a Hotmail account, the
hotmail address doesn't show up in the To: or cc: headers, and Hotmail accepts
but silently drops the message, if the recipient has the "Inbox protector"
feature enabled.
In short, it's not qmail's fault.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Duh! Do I feel stupid! Of course! I turned off the Inbox Protector
feature on the Hotmail account, and sure enough, there is the forwaded
message.
Thanks a lot!
-Cleo
> Cleo Macy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have taken a look at my maillog and strangely enough, I do get a
> > report that the delivery proceeded without any problems. Yet I
never
> > get the email... BUT if I try sending an email directly to the
Hotmail
> > address using pine (sending it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead of
> > root@ for example), the message gets there OK (the maillog for both
> > methods are identical, though).
>
> It's the Hotmail "Inbox protector" feature. If you send mail
directly to a
> Hotmail address with your MUA, the recipient's address shows up in
both the
> envelope, and in the headers of the message (in the To: or cc:
header).
>
> If instead you have a forward directive going to a Hotmail account,
the
> hotmail address doesn't show up in the To: or cc: headers, and
Hotmail accepts
> but silently drops the message, if the recipient has the "Inbox
protector"
> feature enabled.
>
> In short, it's not qmail's fault.
>
> 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.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>
Marco Calistri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,sorry to disturb for so stupid questions but I cannot
> send messages to some mailing list servers:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can't speak to the other hosts you mentioned, but vger is run with some very
interesting policies for accepting mail, primarily because they host the
linux-kernel mailing list (among others). The admins there have all sorts of
filtering rules, and they use the RBL (and possibly RSS, and maybe ORBS, I
can't remember) to stop the huge amount of spam people try to get through to
the lists there.
If you have specific questions about what parts of their policies might be
dropping your submissions, try writing to Matti Arnio (sp?). I don't have an
email address for him at the moment, but he's easy to find by searching the
l-k archives.
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 24-Apr-2001 Johan Almqvist wrote:
> Seemingly, your problem is with sender domains in the message and the
> envelope, not with which SMTP host you use...
>
>> Using q(mail)sendmail and smtproutes as for above
>> I had this kind of responses:
>> --
>> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org.
>> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
>> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
>>
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Connected to 199.183.24.194 but sender was rejected.
>> Remote host said: 553 5.4.3 For MAIL FROM address
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> the policy analysis reports DNS error with
>> your
>> source domain.
>
> This is pretty clear, isn't it?
It appears to me (excuse my ignorance) that my domain is not valid
so message is rejected.Infact mantaining the same configuration:
passing mail via qmail-sendmail but changing my ../defaulthost
to my amprnet domain=ik5bcu.ampr.org,mail was accepted regularly.
The problem on this case was that qmail sent MAILER-DAEMON infos
to ik5bcu(that is another separate machine)...
and not as I want to linux.ik5bcu(qmail machine).
Another unanderstable thing (to my low knowledge) is that if I
use qmail via SMTP all the problem disappears.
My MUA is set to show <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in the FROM field,but I guess
this is not the cause of not accepted mail at vger that apparently
is a DNS cause.
> Use qmail-inject with the -f option to set the sender to the same thing
> that your MUA gives to qmail on SMTP...
Johan,using qmail with my MUA via SMTP I never had problems,
they happen if *I switch MUA to use sendmail*
I've seen a similar script here to use qmail-inject -f but it appears
not very simple to replicate here.
The big question now is :better with qmail-sendmail or qmail-SMTP?
TKS,Marco.
> -Johan
> --
> Johan Almqvist
> http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
On 24-Apr-2001 Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Marco Calistri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hello,sorry to disturb for so stupid questions but I cannot
>> send messages to some mailing list servers:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I can't speak to the other hosts you mentioned, but vger is run with some
> very
> interesting policies for accepting mail, primarily because they host the
> linux-kernel mailing list (among others). The admins there have all sorts of
> filtering rules, and they use the RBL (and possibly RSS, and maybe ORBS, I
> can't remember) to stop the huge amount of spam people try to get through to
> the lists there.
>
> If you have specific questions about what parts of their policies might be
> dropping your submissions, try writing to Matti Arnio (sp?). I don't have an
> email address for him at the moment, but he's easy to find by searching the
> l-k archives.
>
> 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.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Charles <OT>(I've tested getmail,it's very good)</OT>
my problems start if I use MUA through qmail-sendmail option
messages FROM fields appear as sent from unknown domain so vger
reject them(this is right because my qmail domain is not FQDN).
I have to use MUA through qmail-SMTP if I want my messages be accepted.
The test with smtproutes doesn't works here:
LOGS say mail is accepted but I never seen it on mailing-lists.
I thank you for your instructions but I switched back to qmail-SMTP
also if I'd like the qmail-sendmail features,
but I'm not able to set them up to works with servers as
vger.kernel.org.
--
Regards,: Marco Calistri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
gpg key available on http://www.qsl.net/ik5bcu
Xfmail 1.4.7p2 on linux RedHat 6.2 kernel-2.4.2
--
"An organization dries up if you don't challenge it with growth."
-- Mark Shepherd, former President and CEO of Texas Instruments
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As a side note, I had a machine attacked recenly with a pseudo-successful
> compromise and the only three services that could be seen outside the
> firewall were proftpd 2.1.0rc3 and qmail SMTP and qpop3D. (ssh was also
> there)
>
> Are best guess right now is that it was an attack from a user who has ssh
> access on the system...other then that, those three/four ports should not
> have been the source of the compromise -- certainly not qmail or qpop3d --
> maybe proftpd.
Proftpd has had several remote root exploits over the last eighteen months or
so. Granted, the reported ones have been fixed, but with that kind of a track
record, what are the chances that there are zero vulnerabilities left?
I'd strongly suspect proftpd in this case.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Does anyone have any idea why pop would stop delivering 15 minutes
after rebooting? I've provided my findings below.
Thanks again for any help you may provide. You're a great list!
Steven
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 10:19 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: qmail-pop3d not working?
>
>
> It seems to be only pop that stops working after 15 minutes, as
> messages are piling up in the Maildirs. My mail client reports:
>
> A timeout occurred while communicating with the server. (Account:
> '[EMAIL PROTECTED]', POP3 Server: 'mail.idma.com', Error Number:
> 0x800ccc19).
>
> At which point, doing 'sh -x /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run'
> gives me:
>
> tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
>
> My /qmail-pop3d/run file looks like:
>
> #!/bin/sh
> exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \
> idma.com /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1
>
> Doing 'ps auxw | grep pop3' gives me:
>
> root 593 0.0 0.4 1272 344 ? SN 08:06 0:00
> supervise qmail-pop3d
> root 601 0.0 0.6 1344 512 ? SN 08:06 0:00
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup idma
> root 10162 0.0 0.6 1344 516 ? SN 08:24 0:00
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup idma
> root 31977 0.0 0.7 1556 616 pts/0 S 08:38 0:00
> grep pop3
>
> Doing 'cd /var/qmail/supervise && svstat qmail-smtpd' gives me:
>
> qmail-smtpd: up (pid 596) 1962 seconds
>
> Doing 'ls -l ~/* | grep Maildir --after-context=4' gives me:
>
> /home/steven/Maildir:
> total 16
> drwxrwxr-x 2 steven steven 4096 Apr 21 23:22 cur
> drwxrwxr-x 2 steven steven 8192 Apr 23 08:36 new
> drwxrwxr-x 2 steven steven 4096 Apr 23 08:36 tmp
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Steven Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 9:32 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: qmail-pop3d not working?
> >
> >
> > Uh oh-- I may have celebrated too soon. For some reason, I can send
> > but can't receive 15 minutes after rebooting. Does that sound familiar
> > to anyone?
> >
> > Steven
> >
>
>
Steven Katz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone have any idea why pop would stop delivering 15 minutes
> after rebooting?
It sounds odd. I can't think of a reason offhand which would cause this.
However, something else odd struck me:
> > Doing 'ps auxw | grep pop3' gives me:
[...]
> > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup idma
> > root 10162 0.0 0.6 1344 516 ? SN 08:24 0:00
> > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup idma
> > root 31977 0.0 0.7 1556 616 pts/0 S 08:38 0:00
You have two tcpserver instances, both trying to bind to the same interface(s)
and port. At least one of those _has_ to be failing, and it should be showing
up in your logs.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon said,
> You have two tcpserver instances, both trying to bind to the same interface(s)
> and port. At least one of those _has_ to be failing, and it should be showing
> up in your logs.
Steve said,
>>At which point, doing 'sh -x /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run'
>> gives me:
I use this to check for status on supervised processes.
bash-2.04# cd /var/qmail/supervise; svstat * */log
qmail-pop3d: up (pid 658) 178697 seconds
qmail-send: up (pid 9480) 178696 seconds
qmail-smtpd: up (pid 3846) 178697 seconds
qmail-pop3d/log: up (pid 11946) 178697 seconds
qmail-send/log: up (pid 7901) 178697 seconds
qmail-smtpd/log: up (pid 13335) 178697 seconds
When you supervise, and one of the "seconds" columns stays at 0 seconds, you
definitely have a
problem. After you reboot, or better yet, when your pop stops working, try that and
see what
happens.
Also, do not start pop3d from the command line if you are starting it in your boot
scripts, even if
pop3 is not working properly.
Hope that helped
Rick Up
I have a couple of clients that are experiencing a strange problem when
checking mail on our server. When they click send/receive sometimes it
immediately downloads their email, but other times it brings up a dialog box
asking them for their user name and password. The user name and password
are already filled in. When they click ok, it sometimes takes 5 or 6 times
before it goes through. Other times they click ok once and it connects
fine.
Any suggestions?
Robert.
* Aaron L Meehan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quoting Alex Pennace ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>> Am I the only one that finds it ironic that a list for a Unix MTA is
>> plagued by a Windows mail trojan and a mail scanner eager to tell
>> recipients about the disposition of the message?
> which is why I use the following procmail rules given to me at some
> point by another list member and slightly modified. I decided to put
> them in after the last round of newbie whining about us being too
> tough on them ;-) Turns out I don't see any of these virus things.
[/dev/null recipe]
What would that look like as a maildrop rule or filter rule for Courier?
> Anyway, those rules are nicely filtering out all the cruft. :)
Well, yes, but... Personally, I think it would be nice if the cr.yp.to
lists were running ezmlm-idx with at least vcard, html, and everything
MS-binary in mimeremove. That would rid them of these braindamages once
and for all. For the uninitiated:
,----
| (robin@radioactive):(~/lists)$ head -n3 test/mimeremove
| application/excel
| application/rtf
| application/msword
`----
> Sorry to those folks that have to use them at work (never find me
> taking a job like that). Those that use them by choice, well, get a
> real MUA. The SNR is just too high!
More or less true. The clueful people here are using mutt, VM and Gnus. I
wonder what DJB himself uses, but it appears to be mutt as well (pretty
obvious choice - it would take him days to tweak cc-mode in Emacs }:->).
--
Robin S. Socha
http://my.gnus.org/ - To boldly frobnicate what no newbie has grokked before.
* David Talkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Charles Cazabon wrote:
>> I daresay the majority of people on this list are clueful enough to
>> not run vulnerable email clients.
> In a quick not-quite-scientific survey of 6,757 messages in my
> qmail-list folder:
> pnet4:djb 522 $ grep -i ^X-Mailer: qmail \
> |grep -iE 'microsoft|eudora' |wc -l
> 1757
You forgot something, David...
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-->
find pine4.33 -type f | xargs egrep '(sprintf|strcpy|strcat)' | wc -l
3817
Now, why on earth are *you* running qmail instead of sendmail? }:->
--
Robin S. Socha
http://my.gnus.org/ - To boldly frobnicate what no newbie has grokked before.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Robin S. Socha wrote:
>You forgot something, David...
>find pine4.33 -type f | xargs egrep '(sprintf|strcpy|strcat)' | wc -l
> 3817
>
>Now, why on earth are *you* running qmail instead of sendmail? }:->
*gulp* Fair enough. =)
- -d
- --
David Talkington
http://www.spotnet.org
PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/dt000823.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6
iQEVAwUBOuW7Cb1ZYOtSwT+tAQGUagf/QqZh6XreI8cHWX7E4FhKIDLqJDJCHsgo
MYLIV5DUwVYl/MgqRdc32ZRXq5MjQU9G8OJ1FjP1lLgMY225RGudNdjnib8moHxI
Wov0LQ2jTtzAC9irSF1GUjlRnY+5lOSeRjs54emzpfeAFswwDehQ1EcHOK0qOjgk
wbtpH7IkaqLF+4UgkiNmaPNLaGs5K1fLBIQrBltcAqtKbxwbbBv6DYjTkrDt1ody
9lrPndeMu/u66R2WhuhBmkWuYvuTJ6x1qG2xAUKK1lGg6YvE8CVzWH26gSzAPxTz
MGrT/GiezmpCJsPRxAPGavEW099UNJ59Hr/TbWw1XZM70V5D4E+efA==
=U2rT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Robin S. Socha([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.04.24 08:07:51 +0000:
> -->
>
> find pine4.33 -type f | xargs egrep '(sprintf|strcpy|strcat)' | wc -l
> 3817
even if the quantitative analysis does not make _that_ much sense...:
rohrbach@WM:datasink[~/src/stdbuild.mua]59% find mutt-1.2.5 -type f |
xargs egrep '(sprintf|strcpy|strcat)' | wc -l
96
actually there's a difference, yes ;-)
/k
--
> "The path of excess leads to the tower of wisdom." -- W. Blake
KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de
[Key] [KeyID---] [Created-] [Fingerprint-------------------------------------]
GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:48:09AM +0700, Kittiwat Manosuthi wrote:
> Anybody know how to delay failed authentication attempts to prevent
> brute force pwd cracking on POP3 server using qmail & vpopmail?
IMHO not out of the box.
But you surely could construct something in checkpassword that uses
a (process independent) ip related counter and just as you use POP after SMTP
to enable relaying you could add
<ip>:deny
lines to your tcpserver control file.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0
Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299
Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen
asleep yet.
Markus Stumpf([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.04.24 19:47:37 +0000:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:48:09AM +0700, Kittiwat Manosuthi wrote:
> > Anybody know how to delay failed authentication attempts to prevent
> > brute force pwd cracking on POP3 server using qmail & vpopmail?
>
> IMHO not out of the box.
> But you surely could construct something in checkpassword that uses
> a (process independent) ip related counter and just as you use POP after SMTP
> to enable relaying you could add
> <ip>:deny
> lines to your tcpserver control file.
maybe add it to tcpserver?
okay, it would have to have a scoreboard or whatever you might call it
and so fopen() is invoked (maybe) too often... comments?
/k
--
> "What's the best part of getting a blowjob? Five minutes of silence."
KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de
[Key] [KeyID---] [Created-] [Fingerprint-------------------------------------]
GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46
Well.. that's probably the way to go. Unfortunately, it's getting out of
my league now. Anyone think this is an interesting thing to do?
-Kittiwat
>From: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Markus Stumpf([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.04.24 19:47:37 +0000:
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:48:09AM +0700, Kittiwat Manosuthi wrote:
> > > Anybody know how to delay failed authentication attempts to
prevent
> > > brute force pwd cracking on POP3 server using qmail & vpopmail?
> >
> > IMHO not out of the box.
> > But you surely could construct something in checkpassword that uses
> > a (process independent) ip related counter and just as you use POP
after SMTP
> > to enable relaying you could add
> > <ip>:deny
> > lines to your tcpserver control file.
> maybe add it to tcpserver?
> okay, it would have to have a scoreboard or whatever you might call it
> and so fopen() is invoked (maybe) too often... comments?
>
> /k
>
Hi everyone!!! How can I put limits for my qmail's user on attached files ?
Thanks, Alexandre Gonçalves Jacarandá
Alexandre Gonçalves Jacarandá <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How can I put limits for my qmail's user on attached files ?
This is handled in the qmail mailing list archives, and in the various FAQs.
In short, to limit incoming mail sizes, check the manual page for qmail-smtpd.
For outgoing mail, it's a lot trickier, but see the archives.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi!
I have a strange
problem: I can connect to the qmail server using the internal lan without any
problems, but when I am using the dial-up to connect to the server I am getting
a timeout error after starting download messages. Outlook is reporting a 60 sec
timeout error and doesn't resume the connection.
I'm using
qmail-smtpd and qmail-pop3 with tcpserver with the ususal tcpserver switches
(-l0, -R etc.)
Does anywhone know
an answer? Please help!
The server runs
linux mandrake with kernel 2.4.3 and was a clean install with a clean qmail 1.03
installation.
Christian
Christian Dressend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [...] I can connect to the qmail server using the
> internal lan without any problems, but when I am using the dial-up to
> connect to the server I am getting a timeout error after starting download
> messages. Outlook is reporting a 60 sec timeout error and doesn't resume the
> connection.
> I'm using qmail-smtpd and qmail-pop3 with tcpserver with the ususal
> tcpserver switches (-l0, -R etc.)
Could be one of numerous problems with Outlook, could be reverse (and possibly
forward) DNS lookups. You didn't tell us exactly how you're invoking
qmail-smtpd.
Check the FAQs and the archives. Chances are this is actually the #1 FAQ on
this list.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
well the issues have been resolved, ( learnt a lot about how different
servers handle bounces !!):
I was using qmail only for outgoing emails and had a rcpthosts file lying in
my /var/qmail/control.... i hpe you can guess the rest,
the bounces from domains aol, schwab were being refused.
On fixing the above, the bounces were again getting bounced, and i couldn't
send emails from an aol account to an account on my qmail server. The
reverse lookup for the external ip address i had wasn't working,
fixing that things are running smoothly now!
thanks,
Ketan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ketan Bajaj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ketan Bajaj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Greg White"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: incorrect_user@correct_domain accepted
> probably this is what is going wrong:
>
> this time i used qmail-remote directly :
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-remote schwab.com sender-envelope
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> qmail-remote exits with the report rK:
> *****
> r Recipient report: acceptance.
> K Message report: success. host has taken responsibility
> for delivering the message to each acceptable
> recipient.
> *****
> Now if sender-envelope address is at my qmail-server, the bounce never
comes
> back. If i change the sender-envelope address to some another address as
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], a bounce is received at that address!!
> which may mean
> either the remote hosts like aol.com and schwab.com are either not able to
> send the bounce message to the sender-envelope address at my qmail
server,
> which i have been using. (they don't like my server name/ip, but i checked
> that reverse lookup are fine !)
> or they are sending the bounce to the envelope, but qmail is not accepting
> them due to some reasons......
> -ketan
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ketan Bajaj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Greg White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 12:26 PM
> Subject: Re: incorrect_user@correct_domain accepted
>
>
> > i tried something more :
> > sent messages to bad_user_names @yahoo.com, hotmail.com. My qmail logs
> show
> > that they bounce back immediately, with a error code 554 and 550
> > respectively. which is the correct and expected behaviour.
> > No i try again to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED], i get
a
> > 250_ok (remote accepted message) !!! (they should have bounced back).
> >
> > is it that schwab.com, aol.com are delaying the bounce back and sending
> the
> > bounce back after sending the accept message ......
> > and my qmail logs when it gets the 250_ok message, doesn't write any
other
> > error info into logs for the same message id / delivery id. or maybe
> > qmail-remote closes connection with the remote server after seeing a
> 250_ok
> > message and thus doesn't get the delayed bounce ???
> > ( i'm sending the email using "mailto address", and putting a subject
with
> > no message body)
> >
> > as you've mentioned : you see the accept message and followed by a
bounce.
> > what i could be possibly missing? is it some sort of qmail-remote
> > configuration??
> > thanks,
> > Ketan
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Greg White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 1:43 AM
> > Subject: Re: incorrect_user@correct_domain accepted
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:52:54PM -0700, Ketan Bajaj wrote:
> > > > i think i haven't been clear enough in explaining the problem...
> > > > again,
> > > > A (local smtp server) B (remote smtp server)
> > > >
> > > > B is at domain schwab.com, about which i do not know anything,
whether
> > it
> > > > has qmail, sendmail, exchange or anything else.
> > > >
> > > > 1. when A is setup as qmail, and remote address is incorrect@B there
> is
> > no
> > > > bounce from B and the message is accepted at B. I see this at the
> qmail
> > logs
> > > > on A.
> > >
> > > In sending them a test message, I too see the remote host accept the
> > > message, but it promptly bounces it with '550 User Unknown'. Your
qmail
> > > server is likely configured incorrectly -- you should be seeing the
> > > bounces. Please send a message, _headers and all_, that you sent to
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] from your qmail server...
> > >
> > > GW
Dear All:
who have the experience with qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux?
best regards,
hongtao
uh.. i dont have close experience w/ ezmlm.. its installed.. i never tryed
any thing from it though.. but everything else is working fine...
be more specific
----- Original Message -----
From: "hongtao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 5:47 PM
Subject: qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux
> Dear All:
>
> who have the experience with qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux?
>
> best regards,
>
> hongtao
>
>
Hongtao,
I currently use qmail, ezmlm, vpopmail and mySQL (and other mail tools also)
running on a FreeBSD box and they work pretty good together. If you are able
to read Portuguese, I can send you a step-by-step tutorial to install and
setup all these packs from scratch.
Cheers,
Wagner.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hongtao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Ter?a-feira, 24 de Abril de 2001 18:48
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux
>
>
> Dear All:
>
> who have the experience with qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux?
>
> best regards,
>
> hongtao
>
>
Dear All:
because an american use my mail server (qmail) to spam,
the ip of my mail server is now in the RSS list,
i have refused some ip to use our smtp to relay, if my smtp
server now is not open-relay smtp server.
who can help me in this aspect?
thank you very much!
hongtao
hongtao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> because an american use my mail server (qmail) to spam,
> the ip of my mail server is now in the RSS list,
> i have refused some ip to use our smtp to relay, if my smtp
> server now is not open-relay smtp server.
You've got it backwards; you shouldn't be denying relaying to some IP
addresses, you should be restricting relaying to only your IP address(es).
See the archives and FAQs for how to set up selective relaying properly.
If you're asking how to test if your machine is an open relay, see the
archives. If you're asking how to be removed from the RSS, see
http://mail-abuse.org/rss/ .
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Logs?
-----Original Message-----
From: hongtao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 5:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RSS LIST
Dear All:
because an american use my mail server (qmail) to spam,
the ip of my mail server is now in the RSS list,
i have refused some ip to use our smtp to relay, if my smtp
server now is not open-relay smtp server.
who can help me in this aspect?
thank you very much!
hongtao
You've got it backwards; you shouldn't be denying relaying to some IP
addresses, you should be restricting relaying to only your IP address(es).
See the archives and FAQs for how to set up selective relaying properly.
*** i do as you told me, but i can not received mails for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
from other servers.
*** /etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail
tcpserver -v -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u7770 -g2108 0 smtp \
qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | splogger smtpd 3 &
*** /etc/tcp.smtp
:deny,RELAYCLIENT="" #if no this line, all ip will be allowed to relay
202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
*** /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
nie-go.com
staff.nie-go.com
hongtao.com
hongtao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> because an american use my mail server (qmail) to spam,
> the ip of my mail server is now in the RSS list,
> i have refused some ip to use our smtp to relay, if my smtp
> server now is not open-relay smtp server.
* hongtao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010425 01:34]:
> *** /etc/tcp.smtp
> :deny,RELAYCLIENT="" #if no this line, all ip will be allowed to relay
> 202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
This is wrong. Should be:
202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
:allow
Note that the allow at the end doens't set RELAYCLIENT, thus those
machines can only send to the hosts in control/rcpthosts
> *** /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
> nie-go.com
> staff.nie-go.com
> hongtao.com
Where is the RTFM for this?
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
PGP signature
I have a couple of clients that are experiencing a strange problem when
checking mail on our server. When they click send/receive sometimes it
immediately downloads their email, but other times it brings up a dialog box
asking them for their user name and password. The user name and password
are already filled in. When they click ok, it sometimes takes 5 or 6 times
before it goes through. Other times they click ok once and it connects
fine.
Any suggestions?
Robert.
Anything in the logs? What util are you using to check passwords?
Just because you asked the same question the same way twice its not gonna
help anyone answer you.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Lech [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 7:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: re: issues receiving email
I have a couple of clients that are experiencing a strange problem when
checking mail on our server. When they click send/receive sometimes it
immediately downloads their email, but other times it brings up a dialog box
asking them for their user name and password. The user name and password
are already filled in. When they click ok, it sometimes takes 5 or 6 times
before it goes through. Other times they click ok once and it connects
fine.
Any suggestions?
Robert.
Hey all,
I have added a couple of new IP addresses to my /etc/tcp_smtp file and
issued the following command.
tcpserver /etc/tcp_smtp /etc/tcp_smtp.cdb /etc/tcp_smtp.tmp
I get the following error code and I was wondering if anyone could point me
in the right direction. I have used this command before (some time ago)
and it worked fine.
tcpserver:fatal: unable to figure out port number for /etc/tcp_smtp.tmp
Thanks for any help you can provide.
Travis
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 04:58:54PM -0700, Travis Turner wrote:
> I have added a couple of new IP addresses to my /etc/tcp_smtp file and
> issued the following command.
>
> tcpserver /etc/tcp_smtp /etc/tcp_smtp.cdb /etc/tcp_smtp.tmp
Oops.
> I get the following error code and I was wondering if anyone could point me
> in the right direction. I have used this command before (some time ago)
> and it worked fine.
Pointing....
man tcprules
Tim
made a correction to my last email in way of a <
>Hey all,
>
> I have added a couple of new IP addresses to my /etc/tcp_smtp
> file and issued the following command.
>
>tcpserver /etc/tcp_smtp /etc/tcp_smtp.cdb < /etc/tcp_smtp.tmp
>
>I get the following error code and I was wondering if anyone could point
>me in the right direction. I have used this command before (some time
>ago) and it worked fine.
>
>tcpserver:fatal: unable to figure out port number for /etc/tcp_smtp.tmp
>
>Thanks for any help you can provide.
>
>Travis
Hi All,
I am newbie with qmail.
I would like to know how to use sqwebmail in a simple
manner and where I can get information about it?
Many thanks,
Pablo
_______________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Envía mensajes instantáneos y recibe alertas de correo con
Yahoo! Messenger - http://messenger.yahoo.es
