RE: [courier-users] What is the best user-based anti-spam solution?
Good safety tip. My provider doesn't backscatter, and I don't have to provide my userlist, just the domain names to accept mail for. They only filter spam and AV. There are lots of providers in this space, so if you aren't happy with what a vendor can provide you, keep looking. I still get occasional spam traffic presented for random users, but not nearly the volume as when we were doing our own BL processing, and certainly a lot less is getting through. Your mileage will vary, however, my users are happier, and my headaches are fewer. -Original Message- From: Martijn Lievaart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 10:43 AM To: Mike Horwath Cc: Robert Pfister; courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [courier-users] What is the best user-based anti-spam solution? Mike Horwath wrote: >On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 10:27:49AM +0200, Martijn Lievaart wrote: > > >>Ah, but keep in mind that the external provider must know your valid >>users, or you'll create backscatter. And that alone is reason for >>blocklisting by many today. Even the popular spamcop blocklist accepts >>backscatter as a submission criterium. >> >> > >Well, I don't know who you have used as an outsourced AS/AV company >before, but any I have used or checked out in the past actually do >verify remote before accepting *any* message. > >Be careful with your blanket statements. > > Although I until now never saw one do that (and f.i. our IRS gets it wrong, getting AV/AS from the biigest telecom provider here. But I only said that you must not create backscatter, thank you for reitterating my point. M4 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7412&alloc_id=16344&op=click ___ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] What is the best user-based anti-spam solution?
This may seem strange for this forum, but I actually outsourced the virus/spam filtering to an external provider. They have my MX records, and I have SMTP locked down to only accept email from them. Yes it is expensive, but so is my bandwidth. I calculated that my internet connection was using between 64K and 256K (depending on the time of day) just to through away known spam from blacklists. Lots of spam was still getting through to the user, so I was killing my bandwidth, and still getting user complaints. If you can afford it, it may be easier. === -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Holm Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 7:16 AM To: courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [courier-users] What is the best user-based anti-spam solution? Hi, beeing lost in the zillions of posibilities maybe you could give me advice in setting up the "best" antispam solution with courier-mta? What is best for me? User-based automatically generated whitelists would be a nice feature, a webinterface for users would be nice. I really like the idea of blocking spam via the BLACKLISTS environment variable, but how to implement a whitelist of ips that should never be blocked? Thanks, Peter --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7412&alloc_id=16344&op=click ___ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] LDAP aliasing
I wrote the current patch, and have some pride-of-ownership to this, but also some real-world experiences. I don't how my setup compares to other courier installations, it probably isn't the largest, but it is big enough to get a a flavor for any issues. This has run on two machines for the last 6 months: * 300 users, OpenLdap, ~10,000 msgs/day * 1000 users, NDS, ~50,000 msgs/day Both are server-class 2-cpu machines, 4gb memory, and have LDAP running on the same server over localhost. Some operational observations: * Neither machine is ever CPU bound. * 300 user machine open LDAP machine has absolutely no issues * 1000 user NDS machine needs bi-weekly reboot, as there is a memory leak somewhere that causes the machine to eventually go into swapper heaven. Restarting courier, or NDS doesn't seem to fix it. Probably not related to LDAPALIASD or the patch. * we get occasional crashes on ldapaliasd on NDS machine, this could be caused by the extra load put on NDS, a memory leak in the recursive patch, or some functional defect. It is a cause for some concern. Observations from a support organization perspective: * A nested alias ability helps better organize the distribution lists, and other forwarding. * Requiring a maintainer to login into a unix system to edit and rebuild the alias file means I can't delegate this task to a less unix-savy resource. I found that rebuilding the alias file was a step that was often overlooked -- this caused lots of frustration all around. * I can expect even a junior staff member with minimal traing/documentation to update aliases with PhPLDAPadmin. In my circumstances, the extra machine resources were not an issue. Robb -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam Varshavchik Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 4:56 PM To: courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [courier-users] LDAP aliasing Sander Holthaus - Orange XL writes: > Yes. I and a few others asked this question before. I bookmarked the > address for the patch, http://home.earthlink.net/~x1pfister/courier/, > but it doesn't seem to exist anymore. > > Sam, couldn't something like this be implemented in Courier? Though it > will cause some extra overhead, it shouldn't be too much and if people > can define how recursive it is allowed to be (e.g. > LDAP_RECURSION_DEPTH = 0 for disallowing recursion, 1 for allowing one recursive call, etc). The problem is that resolving recursive aliases introduces a lot of additional complexities into the alias resolution process. As a persistent daemon process, courierldapaliasd is very long lived. Long-living daemons, like courierldapaliasd, should avoid using dynamic memory allocations as much as possible. courierldapaliasd uses none, except for whatever happens in the standard C library, and OpenLDAP, which I can't do anything about. There are a number of technical reasons for that. Plus, I have to question whether it is proper to have recursive LDAP aliases in the first place. That means that, for example, an alias that expands out to a hundred addresses will cause a hundred additional round-trip LDAP lookups. Every time. This does not sound like a right design to me. It makes more sense to me to have all the recursive alias resolutions done once, and save the expanded alias list in the LDAP directory. This is exactly how Courier's native mail aliases work. With native aliases, I don't look up every address every time. The makealiases script reads the alias file, expands all aliases recursively, and builds a GDBM/DB database where the aliases are already expanded. This eliminates a lot of waste from the code that receives new messages. Only a single lookup is required for an E-mail address. An LDAP-based setup should be structured in the same way. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl ___ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] To MX or not...
When spam inevitably sneaks through, you end up with it twice -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Kennedy Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 2:38 PM To: Courier Users Subject: Re: [courier-users] To MX or not... On 19 1 2005 at 4:18 pm -0500, Jay Lee wrote: > However, more recently, >spammer techniques has caused me to rethink the usefulness of a Backup >MX Server which accepts all mail for delivery, without spam filters or >rcpt checking. The obvious solution is to put spam filtering and rcpt checking on your secondary MX. Why is this not an option? It's what I do. Both of my machines run identical filtering. -ben -- Ben Kennedy, chief magician zygoat creative technical services 613-228-3392 | 1-866-466-4628 http://www.zygoat.ca --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl ___ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl ___ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
[courier-users] Disable BCC ?
Is there a way to disable BCC on the Courier server? It appears that most of my spam comes in via this manner, and BCC causes lots of discontent in the organization. Thanks Robb -- Robert Pfister Office: 949-340-3529 Corporate Architect Mobile: 719-930-7117 US Technology ResourcesFax: 949-340-3532 --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almosthttp://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt ___ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] Re: How to remove singlequotes from incoming/outgoing mail
>>Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Julian Mehnle writes: > >> I think adding such checks and issuing a syntax error in the >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]'> case would be the way to go. But maybe there's a good >> reason why Courier doesn't do that? > > > Well, I don't think you'd have too much trouble sticking an apostrophe > into a hostname in DNS. If you really wanted to, I think you could > set up an MX record for foo'bar.example.com. Weren't we earlier arguing for standards compliance? I don't have a DNS server I'm willing to perturb to try this, but you cannot register a domain name with anything other than Alphanumeric & a "-" > But that's a stretch. Obviously apostrophes are invalid, however I > don't want to start keeping track of which characters are valid in > DNS, and which ones aren't. You'll never get this right. I think you are looking at: isalpha(x) || isdigit(x) || (x=='.') || (x=='-') I could swear I've seen domain names with underscores in them, but now that I'm looking, I can't seem to locate one. What might be the better solution is to change the error message when a message gets rejected so that the end-user gets a hint as to the likely problem. Rather than saying: <'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'>: <<< No such domain. - <'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'>: <<< No such domain "bar.com'" <<< note: only A-Z, 0-9 and dash are allowable characters in a domain name --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
[courier-users] Checking for single quotes (was removing them)
Julian writes:
>If your users complain about your mailserver not working well with
Microsoft products,
>and if that is because Microsoft products are incompliant to established
internet
> standards, tell your users about it and suggest not using Microsoft
products.
We've all got to play the cards we are dealt. Since we are unlikely to reach
consensus on this, lets move on.
>I think adding such checks and issuing a syntax error in the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]'>
case would be the way to go. >But maybe there's a good reason why Courier
doesn't do that?
This would solve my problem nicely. It would add a bit more time and CPU
cycles to the connection overhead. This would be plausibly offset by the
CPU cycles of sending a reject later on.
I could potentially collaborate on some code changes {sounds of Sam
shrieking}.
I haven't seen any cases where courier rejects an address in this fashion,
to figure out where to shoe-horn the code in. Any ideas?
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE
LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click
___
courier-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] RE: How to remove singlequotes from incoming/outgoing mail
Julian Mehnle wrote: >Why can't your users' mail clients (or whatever produces those misformatted e-mail addresses) > just conform to the standards? My previous attempts to get Microsoft to conform to standards haven't been successful. Do you have any thoughts on how I can be more effective? >When the sending mail client says "RCPT TO: <'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'>", and >Courier replies with an error message, the client could just skip this >address and continue with the next "RCPT TO:" command. Of course, many >clients are broken and stop the sending process at the first error >message, even if the error message in question is definitely non-fatal. >But why does >*Courier* have to be fixed to accommodate those clients? I wasn't aware that there was an option to reject the address at this point. This might be ok, even if the entire mail was rejected. At least the user would look for errors in their side, rather than blaming the server, and causing panic. What would be the downside to adding checks for invalid domain name characters? (this would address all of the potential quoting, bracketing, etc) Another alternative to help user education would be the error message returned. Currently what happens is that a little while later a non-delivery notice appears such as --- UNDELIVERABLE MAIL Your message to the following recipients cannot be delivered: <'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'>: <<< No such domain. In some cases, this triggers a panic about how the entire eMail system must be broken because it couldn't find itself. (It is not as funny when it happens to you) As an alternative, the above message could be a bit more helpful to point out the characters that were found that were suspect. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] RE: How to remove singlequotes from incoming/outgoing mail
>> Any technical solution to this? > >Probably not on the server side. IIRC, the apostrophy character is legal in email addresses, so Courier can't >go around stripping it out. Giving this more thought, an apostrophe is valid in an eMail username, but it isn't a valid character in a fqdn. So an address like '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' should be invalidated as domain.com' can't be a valid FQDN. However, '[EMAIL PROTECTED] should be valid. What I'd like to do is remove the outside most "pairs" of apostrophe's. The logic being that the trailing apostrophe would cause the message to be bounced anyhow. 2nd choice would be to out-right remove the address with a trailing apostrophe, as they won't be delivered anyhow. Send a non-delivery notice on that, and at least the bad eMail won't get perpetrated to the next reply-all. Robb --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] RE: How to remove singlequotes from incoming/outgoing mail
>Robert Pfister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I've got some users that keep adding singlequotes to their usernames. >> I'm not sure how they manage it, but I suspect they are cutting & >> pasting from outlook, or something. >> >> The result is, of course that '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' isn't the same as >> [EMAIL PROTECTED], as the ' is seen as a valid eMail character. >> >> How can I filter, and correct these across the board? I have users >> that think that the eMail server is horked up, down, busted, etc, and >> cause me grief. >> >> Any ideas? >Julian Mehnle writes: >Educate your users. (I mean it. I'm doing that all the time, and my users accept it.) >At my bank's ATM, I can't just type a # before and after my PIN number and then complain to the bank that the >ATM isn't working... I am certainly doing that where I can, but it isn't the best attitude to service my customer with. I don't believe people are typing this quote in themselves. (Not that there aren't people that stupid). I think it comes from 1 or all of the following scenarios: * blackberry/webmail/exchange messages that addresses are munged by outlook /outlook express via "reply-all" * outlook auto-completion, possibly from when they were using some other eMail * cut/paste from other messages * subsequent reply-all on a message where these are already munged, and the person didn't notice. It is an interesting deterrent to make people check each and every address in a bazillion people reply-all, but still not a suggestion my users would tolerate. The analogy from the end-users viewpoint would be if they swiped an ATM card in a reader, they shouldn't have to edit the account number on the keypad before entering the pin. Any technical solution to this? --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
[courier-users] How to remove singlequotes from incoming/outgoing mail
I've got some users that keep adding singlequotes to their usernames. I'm not sure how they manage it, but I suspect they are cutting & pasting from outlook, or something. The result is, of course that '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' isn't the same as [EMAIL PROTECTED], as the ' is seen as a valid eMail character. How can I filter, and correct these across the board? I have users that think that the eMail server is horked up, down, busted, etc, and cause me grief. Any ideas? Thanks Robb ----------- Robert Pfister Cell 719-930-7117 Corporate Architect Fax 719-265-5894 US Technology Resources eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] Emstp: 220 ########### on secondary interface, along with 502 errors when using a Cisco VPN
Thanks -- I finally had a chance to test this, and disabling the fixup mode seemed to make the difference. Robb -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Messmer Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 11:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [courier-users] Emstp: 220 ### on secondary interface, along with 502 errors when using a Cisco VPN Robert Pfister wrote: >When I telnet to the area 10.x.x.x SMTP port via the VPN, I get a >banner of... > >220 # > >Any clues on what the issue could be? > > Yeah, it sounds like your PIX is running SMTP fixup, which breaks most of the features for which you run Courier. Fixup is only really useful if you expect an attacker on the network segment you're "fixing", so you're best off disabling it. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
[courier-users] Emstp: 220 ########### on secondary interface, along with 502 errors when using a Cisco VPN
Here is my setup: Courier running on two interfaces: -- external IP address available on the internet -- internal IP address on area 10.x.x.x address I have an Antivirus gateway also on the 10.x.x.x segment that is delivering eMail in. (this works fine). Also on the 10.x.x.x segment is a Cisco VPN. -- No issues when using the external IP address for send/receive eMail. -- No issues using the internal address (VPN) for pop/imap -- No issues delivering mail via the internal interface from the AV gateway. However, when sending eMail via the VPN/internal interface, I notice "502 errors in the log for the connect", and a rely denied message shortly thereafter. (Strangely, it seems that often the eMail goes through anyhow) Obviously this is rejected my outgoing authentication, and I can "patch" this with a broad entry for 10.x.x.x via smtpaccess, and eMail goes through. That isn't the ideal fix. When I telnet to port 25 from the server, or to the external interface, I get the following banner: 220 smtp.mydomain.com ESMTP (That is what I'd expect) When I telnet to the area 10.x.x.x SMTP port via the VPN, I get a banner of... 220 # Any clues on what the issue could be? Thanks Robb --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] How to run multiple versions of esmtpd?
>From looking at the build script, the --prefix option will give me an entirely new installation in a different directory. I was hoping for a command line option that would do it for me, or some magic pixie-dust. I suppose this is the only way to do this given that there are multiple configuration files I would want to mess. (e.g. esmtpdroutes, smtpaccess, etc) Does anyone else do things like this for production? Thanks Robb -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam Varshavchik Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 4:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [courier-users] How to run multiple versions of esmtpd? Robert Pfister writes: > In looking through the docs, I can't find an obvious way to run two or > more instances of Courier esmtpd on the same machine. (or in fact, any > of the rest of courier) > > This would be useful for running with an external virus scanning > gateway, as one copy would deliver eMail, and another would forward to a gateway. > > Any ideas? It's pretty easy. Build it again, using a different --prefix option to the configure script. You'll just have to make sure that the servers do not listen on the same ports. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
[courier-users] How to run multiple versions of esmtpd?
In looking through the docs, I can't find an obvious way to run two or more instances of Courier esmtpd on the same machine. (or in fact, any of the rest of courier) This would be useful for running with an external virus scanning gateway, as one copy would deliver eMail, and another would forward to a gateway. Any ideas? Thanks Robb --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] Re: Odd LDAP-alias issue
I have patches that enable this available at: www.robertpfister.com/courier I've been running it for several months on a 2000 active user mail server, and haven't seen any issues. Let me know if you need help with it. Thanks Robb -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sander Holthaus - Orange XL Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 1:36 PM To: 'Sam Varshavchik'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [courier-users] Re: Odd LDAP-alias issue > Sander Holthaus - Orange XL writes: > > > I'm having an odd LDAP-alias issue. Aliasses through LDAP > work fine, > > except when they refer to an other alias. > > Correct. > > Aliases are not recursive. :-| Will they be in the future? Having recursive aliases means I only need to change a single mail-adres when some-body behind several aliases changes from mail-address. Without them, it would mean that I need to change them on many place's... Is there anyway around this? Kind Regards, Sander Holthaus --- SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media 100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33 Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift. http://www.shop4tech.com/z/Inkjet_Cartridges/9_108_r285 ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users --- SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media 100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33 Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift. http://www.shop4tech.com/z/Inkjet_Cartridges/9_108_r285 ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
RE: [courier-users] Way of telling who is in BCC field
If you have access to the server logs that the message was sent from (e.g. /var/log/maillog), you can locate the original message and look there. If the mail was sent from some other SMTP server, you are out of luck. You can make some educated guesses from the maillog if other users on the machine you have access to were in the BCC list. Robb -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Etcell Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 8:59 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [courier-users] Way of telling who is in BCC field Dear courier users, This is question about email in general. If I was to receive an email knowing that I was one of many recipients listed in the BCC field of the sender. Is there anyway of telling who the rest the recipients are? Looking forward to your replies. Regards Michael --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
[courier-users] LDAP recursive Alias Patch available
I've made a patch for LDAP "recursive" alias resolution. I've been running this for a couple of months without any problems It is available at: www.robertpfister.com/courier Robb --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event. GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway http://2004/guadec.org ___ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
