[pfx] Re: forwarding questions
Tom Reed via Postfix-users writes: > (...) > How can I setup it to both reach local mailbox and forwarding? > You first have to read 3 times very carefully: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/175365?sjid=13805511033984428370-AP I read all emails at Gmail. Yes i'm forwarding user like you. Sincerely, -- ^고맙습니다 _布德天下_ 감사합니다_^))// ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: forwarding questions
On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 08:32:29AM +0800, Tom Reed via Postfix-users wrote: > I have a local real mailbox: u...@foo.com. When I setup this alias > map in virtual_alias_maps file: > > u...@foo.com u...@gmail.com > > (then postmap this file). The message sent to u...@foo.com won't > reach into mailbox, but just forwarded to gmail. > > How can I setup it to both reach local mailbox and forwarding? This is a bad idea. Don't do this. Forwarding spam to gmail, or mail from external senders with SPF policies, ... will fail to be delivered, and will tarnish your server's "reputation". It can of course be made to "work" (in the sense of queueing the mail for delivery), but really, don't. -- Viktor. ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] forwarding questions
Hello list, I have a local real mailbox: u...@foo.com When I setup this alias map in virtual_alias_maps file: u...@foo.com u...@gmail.com (then postmap this file). The message sent to u...@foo.com won't reach into mailbox, but just forwarded to gmail. How can I setup it to both reach local mailbox and forwarding? Thanks a lot. Tom ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: broken links in postfix.org
Eray Aslan via Postfix-users: > Some links seem to be broken in postfix.org downloads page > http://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/index.html. Example: > http://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/experimental/postfix-3.9-20230419.tar.gz > > I also do not see a link to postfix-3.7.5, 3.6.9 etc Should now be fixed (at ftp.porcupine.org). Wietse ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: Postfix server is sending non-delivery notifications with a blank "from" address
On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 11:13:13AM -0300, Rejaine Monteiro via Postfix-users wrote: > And is there any way to not send bounces to a specific email (ex: > don't send bounces to nore...@domain.com) Em qui., 27 de abr. de 2023 às 11:57, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users < postfix-users@postfix.org> escreveu: Don't accept email from them (or anyone else for that matter) that will later bounce. As much as possible "reject" undeliverable mail *before* it enters the queue. On 27.04.23 14:15, Rejaine Monteiro via Postfix-users wrote: I know that bounces are necessary.. but addresses like "noreply" are usually automation robots and do not receive responses and can generate double bounces.. Not be fixed (not an error), I just want to know if there is a way to avoid bounces to specific addresses (like nore...@somedomain.com) .. sorry if I wasn't clear (bad english) Why would such mail bounce? Do you accept mail for nonexisting addresses? -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. I intend to live forever - so far so good. ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: Postfix server is sending non-delivery notifications with a blank "from" address
On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 02:15:38PM -0300, Rejaine Monteiro wrote: > I know that bounces are necessary.. > but addresses like "noreply" are usually automation robots and do not > receive responses and can generate double bounces.. Responses may not be read (or, in particular, *replied-to*), but bounces are still expected to be processed, even with "noreply" addresses. > Not be fixed (not an error), I just want to know if there is a way to avoid > bounces to specific addresses (like nore...@somedomain.com) > .. sorry if I wasn't clear (bad english) The best solution is to not accept undeliverable messages. Then you'll rarely if ever send bounces. When you do, the envelope sender will be empty as required. -- Viktor. ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: Postfix server is sending non-delivery notifications with a blank "from" address
I know that bounces are necessary.. but addresses like "noreply" are usually automation robots and do not receive responses and can generate double bounces.. Not be fixed (not an error), I just want to know if there is a way to avoid bounces to specific addresses (like nore...@somedomain.com) .. sorry if I wasn't clear (bad english) Em qui., 27 de abr. de 2023 às 11:57, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users < postfix-users@postfix.org> escreveu: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 11:13:13AM -0300, Rejaine Monteiro via > Postfix-users wrote: > > > I have a Postfix 3.4.13 that sends non-delivery notifications with a > blank > > "from" address, like so: > > > > postfix/bounce[3337994]: 536301634D8: sender non-delivery notification: > 421CF1634EB > > postfix/qmgr[2272522]: 421CF1634EB: from=<>, size=8212, nrcpt=1 (queue > active) > > This is *required* by the SMTP specification, in order to avoid bounce > loops. > > > How can I fix this? > > There's nothing to fix. > > > And is there any way to not send bounces to a specific email (ex: > > don't send bounces to nore...@domain.com) > > Don't accept email from them (or anyone else for that matter) that will > later bounce. As much as possible "reject" undeliverable mail *before* > it enters the queue. > > -- > Viktor. > ___ > Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org > To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org > -- *Esta mensagem pode conter informações confidenciais ou privilegiadas, sendo seu sigilo protegido por lei. Se você não for o destinatário ou a pessoa autorizada a receber esta mensagem, não pode usar, copiar ou divulgar as informações nela contidas ou tomar qualquer ação baseada nessas informações. Se você recebeu esta mensagem por engano, por favor avise imediatamente ao remetente, respondendo o e-mail e em seguida apague-o. Agradecemos sua cooperação.* ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: postscreen question
On 4/27/23 04:47, Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users wrote: * Ken Peng via Postfix-users: Using rspamd instead of postscreen? I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. If you suggest relying on rspamd only, and forgo postscreen, I have to disagree. In my experience, postscreen has proven highly useful in spam prevention, in particular when DNSBL lookups are configured in addition to the standard tests. The latter already catch many spammers in a hurry, though. Postscreen is good for rejecting the low-hanging fruit in fast before-accept checks. It's not so good at deep inspection. If you want deep inspection, do it after acceptance using a more suitable tool ... such as rspamd. Don't try to do it in postscreen. That's not its intended purpose. -- Phil Stracchino Babylon Communications ph...@caerllewys.net p...@co.ordinate.org Landline: +1.603.293.8485 Mobile: +1.603.998.6958 ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] broken links in postfix.org
Some links seem to be broken in postfix.org downloads page http://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/index.html. Example: http://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/experimental/postfix-3.9-20230419.tar.gz I also do not see a link to postfix-3.7.5, 3.6.9 etc -- Eray ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: body_checks not catching all backscatter
* Sebastian Wiesinger [2023-04-27 17:59]: > root@alita:/etc/postfix# postmap -q - regexp:/etc/postfix/body_checks.pcre > Message-ID: > reject SPAM backscatter with forged domain name in Message-ID header And of course I ran into my own filter when I got the mail back from the mailinglist. :( I've deactivated the filter for now, but for this test case it worked. -- 'Are you Death?' ... IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE SCYTHE. -- Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] body_checks not catching all backscatter
Hi everyone, I'm not sure if I'm missing something but I can't find out why my body_checks doesn't catch all the backscatter I'm getting right now. I've it configured like this: root@alita:/etc/postfix# postconf -n body_checks body_checks = pcre:$config_directory/body_checks.pcre root@alita:/etc/postfix# cat body_checks.pcre /^[> ]*Message-ID:.*@(fire-world\.de)/ reject SPAM backscatter with forged domain name in Message-ID header One example it doesn't catch seems to match the regex when I test it manually: root@alita:/etc/postfix# postmap -q - regexp:/etc/postfix/body_checks.pcre reject SPAM backscatter with forged domain name in Message-ID header I've got the original message (from my mailbox) here for you: https://www.karotte.org/big/backscatter.txt As I said, Postfix rejects some of the backscatter but not all. Any idea why it didn't reject this? Best Regards Sebastian -- 'Are you Death?' ... IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE SCYTHE. -- Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: Postfix server is sending non-delivery notifications with a blank "from" address
On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 11:13:13AM -0300, Rejaine Monteiro via Postfix-users wrote: > I have a Postfix 3.4.13 that sends non-delivery notifications with a blank > "from" address, like so: > > postfix/bounce[3337994]: 536301634D8: sender non-delivery notification: > 421CF1634EB > postfix/qmgr[2272522]: 421CF1634EB: from=<>, size=8212, nrcpt=1 (queue active) This is *required* by the SMTP specification, in order to avoid bounce loops. > How can I fix this? There's nothing to fix. > And is there any way to not send bounces to a specific email (ex: > don't send bounces to nore...@domain.com) Don't accept email from them (or anyone else for that matter) that will later bounce. As much as possible "reject" undeliverable mail *before* it enters the queue. -- Viktor. ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Postfix server is sending non-delivery notifications with a blank "from" address
Hi I have a Postfix 3.4.13 that sends non-delivery notifications with a blank "from" address, like so: postfix/bounce[3337994]: 536301634D8: sender non-delivery notification: 421CF1634EB postfix/qmgr[2272522]: 421CF1634EB: from=<>, size=8212, nrcpt=1 (queue active) How can I fix this? And is there any way to not send bounces to a specific email (ex: don't send bounces to nore...@domain.com) -- *Esta mensagem pode conter informações confidenciais ou privilegiadas, sendo seu sigilo protegido por lei. Se você não for o destinatário ou a pessoa autorizada a receber esta mensagem, não pode usar, copiar ou divulgar as informações nela contidas ou tomar qualquer ação baseada nessas informações. Se você recebeu esta mensagem por engano, por favor avise imediatamente ao remetente, respondendo o e-mail e em seguida apague-o. Agradecemos sua cooperação.* ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Domain scoring
Do you know any plugins for scoring a domain? For example, new registered domain, free domain get the low scores. Thanks. -- https://kenpeng.pages.dev/ ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: postscreen question
On 26.04.23 19:40, Ken Peng via Postfix-users wrote: Using rspamd instead of postscreen? no, using spamassassin or rspamd in addition to postscreen. postscreen is great for eliminating bots, which is something other spam filters only hardly detect. It's also can machines listed in multiple DNS lists you apparently won't accept/process mail from. Just don't enable after-220 tests without good understanding what they do. I am building a new server where I would like to build the best spam filter possible :) I am checking postscreen these days. I am planning to turn on the "deep tests" as well, but it seems to be really scary to me :) In the doc they say that I can have 2 IPs and set up a secondary MX record and usually the sender will immediately connect back from the same IP. How good idea is it to do this ? What happens if the sender has a really big pool of IPs and they will not use the same IP when reconnect to the 2nd MX ? Theoretically it means that that sender will never be able to send mail to us right ? What is the best practice here ? I am curious for your opinions. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Atheism is a non-prophet organization. ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix ...' get segfault if multiple entries exist in master.cf
Hi In old version 3.4.x problem not exists W dniu 27.04.2023 o 14:50, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze: SATOH Fumiyasu (TSUCHIDA Fumiyasu) via Postfix-users: I see the following problems. 1. `postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix ...'` will duplicates entries in master.cf. Nice find: postconf should reject this request, because the key (bar/unix) does not match the content (foo unix ...). 2. `postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix ...' get segfault if multiple entries exist in master.cf. postconf has not been tested on all possible forms of broken master.cf file. Wietse ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org -- ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix ...' get segfault if multiple entries exist in master.cf
SATOH Fumiyasu (TSUCHIDA Fumiyasu) via Postfix-users: > I see the following problems. > > 1. `postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix ...'` will duplicates entries > in master.cf. Nice find: postconf should reject this request, because the key (bar/unix) does not match the content (foo unix ...). > 2. `postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix ...' get segfault if multiple > entries exist in master.cf. postconf has not been tested on all possible forms of broken master.cf file. Wietse ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix ...' get segfault if multiple entries exist in master.cf
Hi In centos7 root@node2-klone:~# postconf mail_version mail_version = 3.4.23 root@node2-klone:~# postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false' root@node2-klone:~# postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false' root@node2-klone:~# postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false' root@node2-klone:~# postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false' root@node2-klone:~# postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false' root@node2-klone:~# tail /etc/postfix/master.cf ... policy-spf unix - n n - - spawn user=nobody argv=/usr/bin/policyd-spf #policy unix - n n - - spawn # user=nobody argv=/usr/bin/perl /usr/lib/postfix/postfix-policyd-spf-perl /etc/postfix-policyd-spf-python/policyd-spf.conf foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false W dniu 27.04.2023 o 01:48, SATOH Fumiyasu (TSUCHIDA Fumiyasu) via Postfix-users pisze: I see the following problems. 1. `postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix ...'` will duplicates entries in master.cf. 2. `postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix ...' get segfault if multiple entries exist in master.cf. ``` # postconf mail_version mail_version = 3.7.4 # postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false' # tail /etc/postfix/master.cf ... foounix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false # postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false' # tail /etc/postfix/master.cf ... foounix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false foounix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false # postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix - n n - - pipe argv=/bin/false' Segmentation fault ``` -- ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: postscreen question
* Ken Peng via Postfix-users: > Using rspamd instead of postscreen? I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. If you suggest relying on rspamd only, and forgo postscreen, I have to disagree. In my experience, postscreen has proven highly useful in spam prevention, in particular when DNSBL lookups are configured in addition to the standard tests. The latter already catch many spammers in a hurry, though. According to logs of the mail servers I maintain, a large number of connection attempts are nipped in the bud by postscreen. Rspamd sure has its uses, but setting up postscreen as the first line of defense is a Smart Move™ in my book. -Ralph ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
[pfx] Re: postscreen question
On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 18:47, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users < postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote: > Don't do it unless you aree willing to suffer some pain. The mere > fast that a button exists does not impy that everyone must use it. > > Dear Wietse, Could you please give me some examples where you think it will cause the most pain ? Thanks, Mitya ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
