Patch for spam

[Hotdog]

Hi,
  I want to write the following patch for qmail. At some small site,you can only 
filtrate the spam by the filter invoke from dotqmail, but our server will receive over 
10 junk mails per day,qmail-send & qmail-local  take so much time to delivert 
these letters. Kill the spam in qmail-smtpd should be the best way.
  But the problem is how to write the function 'spamcheck(int spamflag)' ? 


In qmail-smtpd.c:

+  spam=0;
  received(&qqt,"SMTP",local,remoteip,remotehost,remoteinfo,fakehelo);
  blast(&hops);
+ spamcheck(&spam);   //The functin will read some control file,such as 
+control/badkeyword, if matched,then ...
  hops = (hops >= MAXHOPS);
  if (hops) qmail_fail(&qqt);
  qmail_from(&qqt,mailfrom.s);
  qmail_put(&qqt,rcptto.s,rcptto.len);

  qqx = qmail_close(&qqt);
  if (!*qqx) { acceptmessage(qp); return; }
  if (hops) { out("554 too many hops, this message is looping (#5.4.6)\r\n"); return; }
+ if (spam) { out("551 Spam shit! You are not welcome!\r\n"; return; );
  if (databytes) if (!bytestooverflow) { out("552 sorry, that message size excee...
  if (*qqx == 'D') out("554 "); else out("451 ");
  out(qqx + 1);
  out("\r\n");

then,it will do something like this:

220 mydomain.com ESMTP
helo iamspam
250 mydomain.com
mail from:<>
250 ok
rcpt to:
250 ok
data
354 go ahead
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


win money from <---'win money' is in control/badkeyword,so this letter 
should be refused.


.
551 Spam shit! You are not welcome!



Thanks very much!



Hotdog
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Patch for spam

[Van Liedekerke Franky]

don't reinvent the wheel. If this is what you want, use the anti-UCE spam
patch from Sam (see qmail pages)

Franky

> --
> From: Hotdog[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 7:00 PM
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:  Patch for spam
> 
> Hi,
>   I want to write the following patch for qmail. At some small site,you
> can only filtrate the spam by the filter invoke from dotqmail, but our
> server will receive over 10 junk mails per day,qmail-send &
> qmail-local  take so much time to delivert these letters. Kill the spam in
> qmail-smtpd should be the best way.
>   But the problem is how to write the function 'spamcheck(int spamflag)' ?
> 
> 
> 
> In qmail-smtpd.c:
> 
> +  spam=0;
>   received(&qqt,"SMTP",local,remoteip,remotehost,remoteinfo,fakehelo);
>   blast(&hops);
> + spamcheck(&spam);   //The functin will read some control file,such as
> control/badkeyword, if matched,then ...
>   hops = (hops >= MAXHOPS);
>   if (hops) qmail_fail(&qqt);
>   qmail_from(&qqt,mailfrom.s);
>   qmail_put(&qqt,rcptto.s,rcptto.len);
> 
>   qqx = qmail_close(&qqt);
>   if (!*qqx) { acceptmessage(qp); return; }
>   if (hops) { out("554 too many hops, this message is looping
> (#5.4.6)\r\n"); return; }
> + if (spam) { out("551 Spam shit! You are not welcome!\r\n"; return; );
>   if (databytes) if (!bytestooverflow) { out("552 sorry, that message size
> excee...
>   if (*qqx == 'D') out("554 "); else out("451 ");
>   out(qqx + 1);
>   out("\r\n");
> 
> then,it will do something like this:
> 
> 220 mydomain.com ESMTP
> helo iamspam
> 250 mydomain.com
> mail from:<>
> 250 ok
> rcpt to:
> 250 ok
> data
> 354 go ahead
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> win money from <---'win money' is in control/badkeyword,so
> this letter should be refused.
> 
> 
> .
> 551 Spam shit! You are not welcome!
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks very much!
> 
> 
> 
> Hotdog
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

Re: Mail client and sorting

[Anand Buddhdev]

On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 07:33:37PM -0400, Subba Rao wrote:

> I have subscribed to many mailing lists. Soon I will have my Qmail working. My 
>favorite
> mail client is ELM. How do I sort differrent mailing lists into different folders? 
>Are any other

Elm comes with a filter utility to sort mail into different folders. If
you want to do filtering with other mail clients, you can use procmail
or maildrop.

> mail readers in X, not KDE nor GTK based clients. I want the threading capability.

Netscape can thread messages, but I also suggest you look at mutt
(http://www.mutt.org). Although it's not X-based, it is very nice.

-- 
See complete headers for more info

qmail Digest 0 Jan 1900 00:00:00 -0000 Issue 762

[qmail-digest-help]

qmail Digest 0 Jan 1900 00:00:00 - Issue 762

Topics (messages 30372 through 30407):

Re: Kurt's Closet on qmail
30372 by:  Thomas M. Sasala
30376 by:  Daniluk, Cris

Re: SMTP lookups
30373 by:  Robert Varga

inetd support (was: Kurt's Closet on qmail)
30374 by:  Dave Sill

Re: When will qmail back off to the next MX?
30375 by:  Greg Owen
30388 by:  Jason Haar
30389 by:  Russell Nelson
30390 by:  Jason Haar
30392 by:  Russell Nelson
30394 by:  Racer X
30397 by:  Jon Rust

Re: Virtual Domains again
30377 by:  David Dyer-Bennet

inetd not supported---not? (was RE: Kurt's Closet on qmail)
30378 by:  Mate Wierdl

Not yet solved : Existing/nonexisting users
30379 by:  Puck
30380 by:  Russell Nelson

Fooling qmail inject
30381 by:  Blaine Lefler
30382 by:  Vince Vielhaber

defaultdomain and mail header fields
30383 by:  Lyndon Griffin
30384 by:  Dave Sill
30386 by:  Lyndon Griffin
30387 by:  Dave Sill

race condition in qmail-popbull
30385 by:  Russell Nelson
30401 by:  Jaye Mathisen

Default time for server UTC?
30391 by:  Joseph R. Junkin
30393 by:  Sam

strange behaviour of delivering to local user
30395 by:  Marco Leeflang

How do you set the From and Received: line dates to match the one in the  Date: line ?
30396 by:  Ric Verkler

Notification E-mails
30398 by:  Qmail-User
30403 by:  seiheng

Mail client and sorting
30399 by:  Subba Rao
30407 by:  Anand Buddhdev

David Summers
30400 by:  Qmail-User

Qmail woes
30402 by:  Bryan J. Ischo

URGENT: HELP BIG ATTACHMENTS NOT RECIVING
30404 by:  Manohar Pradhan

Patch for spam
30405 by:  Hotdog
30406 by:  Van Liedekerke Franky

Administrivia:

To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


--



> So then the assumption is that all qmail users subscribe to - and read -
> every message on this list.  Not only that, new users have also gone back
> and read every message that was ever posted.

And if they would, they would find threads like this.  Take
it off line pleese.

-- 
+---+
+  Thomas M. Sasala, Electrical Engineer   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   +
+  MRJ Technology Solutionshttp://www.mrj.com   +
+  10461 White Granite Drive, Suite 102(W)(703)277-1714 +
+  Oakton, VA   22124  (F)(703)277-1702 +
+---+




Fortuantely, only about 5% or so of the laws actually passed by this
"useful" group ever actually make it into every state's law. For as
unproductive and unsuccessful as they are, it's a wonder the commission
exists. I'm not too frightened about UCITA becoming a bill. Especially not
in my state where we have a referrendum and initiative.

> -Original Message-
> From: James J. Lippard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 6:00 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Kurt's Closet on qmail
> 
> 
> There is proposed new law on the matter--recent revisions to the
> Uniform Commercial Code, Section 2B, a/k/a UCITA (Uniform Computer
> Information Transactions Act).  It has been approved by the National
> Conference of Commissioners for Uniform State Law and will be 
> introduced
> in most state legislatures early next year.  Do a web search 
> for "UCITA"
> or "UCC 2B" and you'll find all kinds of opposition web pages.
> 
> Jim Lippard   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.discord.org/
> Unsolicited bulk email charge:   $500/message.   Don't send me any.
> PGP Fingerprint: 0C1F FE18 D311 1792 5EA8  43C8 7AD2 B485 DE75 841C
> 
> On 16 Sep 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> > >craig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > >> I was told last night by an IP lawyer that 
> "click-through licenses have
> > >> been upheld in court".
> > >
> > >Yes, I believe that's been the case for a while.  A click on ACCEPT
> > >appears to be legally roughly equivalent to the signature 
> on a contract,
> > >provided you can prove the person did that (signatures are 
> a bit more
> > >permanent and lasting and easier to establish).  This is a 
> Good Thing; if
> > >this weren't the case, ISP AUPs and the like would be 
> uninforceable and
> > >e-commerce would become very difficult.  I don't have a 
> problem with that.
> > 
> > Yes, that's the reasoning, and I understand it perfectly well...to a
> > point.
> > 
> > Exactly *who* are the parties to the "[rough] equivalent to the
> > signature on a contra

Re: Mail client and sorting

[Mikko Hänninen]

Anand Buddhdev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Fri, 17 Sep 1999:
> Elm comes with a filter utility to sort mail into different folders. If
> you want to do filtering with other mail clients, you can use procmail
> or maildrop.

Actually, last I heard was that support for filter was discontinued in
the current elm release version(s).  I'd personally recommend using
procmail or maildrop with elm, even if filter was available.

> Netscape can thread messages, but I also suggest you look at mutt
> (http://www.mutt.org). Although it's not X-based, it is very nice.

Mutt is indeed very nice, especially for people who have been using elm
though by no means limited to them.  And it also supports qmail-style
maildirs (to add some qmail-relevance to the discussion...).


Mikko
-- 
// Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu  //  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  //  http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer  //   net.freak  //   DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
"You watching MTV while I lie dreaming in an MT bed" -- The Corrs

Re: Kurt's Closet on qmail

[Russ Allbery]

Chris Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Surely also, since you haven't accepted the 'new' contract you can still
> (under basic copyright law) modify the software etc. and thus bypass the
> bit that asks you to accept the new terms anyway.

Basic copyright law, by my reading, does not grant you the right to modify
software that you own, believe it or not.  Please don't take my word for
it; check it yourself.  You can download a copy of the law from the
Library of Congress copyright page.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Re: Kurt's Closet on qmail

[Petr Novotny]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 17 Sep 99, at 5:15, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Surely also, since you haven't accepted the 'new' contract you can still
> > (under basic copyright law) modify the software etc. and thus bypass the
> > bit that asks you to accept the new terms anyway.
> 
> Basic copyright law, by my reading, does not grant you the right to modify
> software that you own, believe it or not.  Please don't take my word for
> it; check it yourself.  You can download a copy of the law from the
> Library of Congress copyright page.

And you said that the copyright law is the same all over the world: 
The Czech copyright law explicitely permits to make modifications 
for your own use, and even you're allowed to as much reverse 
engineering as you need to keep the software doing what you 
bought it for (my wording is inexact).

On the other hand, the Czech law assumes that a program is 
essentially a book. Plus, it pretty much forbids free software by 
stating that the author must be paid for the copyright...


But the bottom line is: The licence for qmail may or may not hold. 
It's not as straightforward as many other licences are. There are 
people who are distracted by that, and those people get to the front 
pages on some respected sites (SecurityPortal).

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60 
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html

iQA/AwUBN+JColMwP8g7qbw/EQImWgCg0668/r3cNZzczl3dVCKgQ3dAcCAAoI7P
CrNF5Hx1yZWVGD93Ue6W31lr
=Mmfl
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antek.cz
PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
-- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
 [Tom Waits]

sending big file

[Jan Stanik]

Hi,

We use qmail (on FreeBSD 4) as a relay smtp server, and 
some of our customers with dialup access have problem to send 
"big" files (over 500 kB) through this server. It takes too much time, 
and then error message (timeout or TCP error) appears. It does not 
depend on user's mail client (similar error with Pegasus Mail and 
Outlook Express).
With sendmail, I had no problems. 
Can You help me, please?
Thanks,




--
  Jan Stanik
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Telenor Internet,s.r.o

Re: Kurt's Closet on qmail

[Russ Allbery]

Petr Novotny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> And you said that the copyright law is the same all over the world:

*Mostly*.  There are differences, particularly in the areas of exceptions
for particular types of works, and I think the US law is considerably more
complicated in the area of audio recordings.

> The Czech copyright law explicitely permits to make modifications for
> your own use, and even you're allowed to as much reverse engineering as
> you need to keep the software doing what you bought it for (my wording
> is inexact).

That sounds like a much saner approach.

> On the other hand, the Czech law assumes that a program is essentially a
> book. Plus, it pretty much forbids free software by stating that the
> author must be paid for the copyright...

That, on the other hand... *wry grin*

> But the bottom line is: The licence for qmail may or may not hold.  It's
> not as straightforward as many other licences are.

Yup.  Exactly.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Re: Qmail woes

[Dave Sill]

"Bryan J. Ischo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I followed the instructions in the qmail HOWTO and got rid of sendmail
>entirely.  But later in the day I discovered that emails simply were
>not getting delivered.

Didn't you test it after the install?

>qmail-smtpd was happily accepting them for
>delivery but where they went, who knows.  We are using /var/mail
>files for receiving mail (for compatibility with our IMAP and POP
>servers).  These files stopped being updated and I can find no
>traces of received mail anywhere in /var/qmail/queue.

Did you run qmail-qstat and qmail-qread? If your logging was working,
the qmail-send logs would be helpful.

>I was unable
>to send mail using the /bin/mail program on the mail host.

What does "unable to send mail" mean? Did the command return an error?
Did everything appear normal, except that the mail wasn't delivered
where you expected it? "I did some things and they didn't work" isn't
terribly helpful.

>So I
>tried the old sendmail.bak sendmail executable and, after making it
>suid again, it worked.  So I removed the links from /usr/lib/sendmail
>and /usr/sbin/sendmail to /var/qmail/bin/sendmail, and replaced those
>links with links to the old sendmail.bak.  Now users are receiving
>mail again.  I find it very strange.

Yes, I find it strange that one would use Sendmail's sendmail in a
qmail installation, too. :-)

>My guess is that the fact that /var/qmail/bin/sendmail being
>group qmail and all of our mail files in /var/mail being group
>mail, and the fact that /var/qmail/bin/sendmail is not suid or
>anything, meant that it didn't have permissions to write mail
>to the mail files.

Sorry, that's not even close. The qmail sendmail just calls
qmail-inject, which places the message in qmail's queue, where's it's
picked up by qmail-send and passed to qmail-lspawn &|
qmail-rspawn. For a local delivery, qmail-lspawn calls qmail-local,
which, in your configuration, would invoke /bin/mail to do the final
delivery.

>Anyone know if there's any hope of recovering the mails which were
>lost at this time?

Hope? Sure. Whether they can or not depends upon what happened to
them. qmail is pretty careful not to toss messages, but /bin/mail
might not be.

>Silently lost mail files are the worst case
>scenario for a mail server and I am really afraid that that's what
>we have here.

If that happened, it wasn't qmail's fault, it was yours.

>The second problem we have is that qmail doesn't seem to log
>properly.

Correction: the second problem you have is that your qmail isn't
logging properly. qmail *does* log just fine for hundreds or thousands 
of users. If yours isn't logging, it's because something is fubar'd
on your system.

>Qmail is started via:
>
>qmail-start '|preline -f /bin/mail "$USER"' splogger qmail

Where'd you get that? Have you looked at /var/qmail/boot/binm2?

>But where do the messages get logged?

splogger sends them to syslog. What syslog does with them is between
you and syslog. See "man syslogd" and "more /etc/syslog.conf".

>At no time have we ever
>received any log messages from qmail except for the following
>in /var/adm/messages:
>
>Sep 16 20:55:35 level qmail: 937529735.086563 alert: oh no! lost spawn
>connection! dying...
>
>Which occurred when I manually killed qmail when restarting it.

That's very strange. If that message was logged, you should have also
logged, at least, the startup message from qmail-send. If you do:

echo foo | /var/qmail/bin/splogger qmail

Does a message get logged?

Personally, I wouldn't spend much time trying to figure out syslog. I
use daemontools. See:

http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#start-qmail

-Dave

Re: Mail client and sorting

[Mirko Zeibig]

On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 02:44:53PM +0300, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
> Mutt is indeed very nice, especially for people who have been using elm
> though by no means limited to them.  And it also supports qmail-style
> maildirs (to add some qmail-relevance to the discussion...).
I like mutt as well and use it most of the time (except when it comes to
clean up my imap-folders, then a drag'n'drop-thing comes handy).

To make this a bit qmail-specific: distribution of your mail, depends:
- I have a multidrop-pop-mailbox where every mail sent to @picard.inka.de is
  thrown in.
- So I just subscribe with mirko-qmail@, mirko-php@ to lists and have the
corresponding .qmail-qmail, .qmail-php in my home-dir, which will deliver it
in folders, ala ~/lists/qmail/
- I took these out of my standard ~/mail-folder as imapd is not very happy
with more than 1000 messages/folder ;-).

Regards
Mirko
-- 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
privat: http://sites.inka.de/picard
qmail, ldap and rh-isdn & Commerce: http://www.webideal.de/#downloads
be aware of culture www.uni-karlsruhe.de/~etcetera

Re: URGENT: HELP BIG ATTACHMENTS NOT RECIVING

[Dave Sill]

Manohar Pradhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I have a problem with my qmail server (qmail 1.03). I can send/receive
>normal emails but when i try to send attachments and big files, then the
>SMTP server won't answer and it takes very long time. Can anybody give me
>some idea why it is happening?

Not really, unless you give us some more information. "It doesn't
work" isn't terribly useful.

>From "Life with qmail"
:

  When you ask questions, please try to include sufficient details to
  make it possible for people to respond:

What did you do? What's your configuration? Include qmail-showctl
output if you're not sure what's important. What action did you
take?

What did you expect to happen? What was the outcome you were
trying to achieve? Don't assume the reader can guess. 

What did happen? Describe the actual result. Include log file
clippings and copies of messages, with headers.

Specifically:

  What client are you using?
  What happens when you try to send big messages?
  What do the logs show?

-Dave

ANNOUNCE: /var/qmail/control/locals and regex

[Robert Sander]

Hi!

There is now a webpage for the regex-patch at

http://beteigeuze.cs.tu-berlin.de/linux/qmail/

-- 
Greetings

Robert Sander
home.pages.de/~gurubert, pgp available there

RE: When will qmail back off to the next MX?

[Greg Owen]

> > Sorry? Did I miss an earlier message? Where does it say 
> > it's a violation?
> 
> Quoting RFC821:
> 
>   One important reply is the connection greeting.  Normally, a
>   receiver will send a 220 "Service ready" reply when the 
>   connection is completed. 

But the Xerox servers aren't accepting a connection.  The apparent
accepted connection is a side effect of the Raptor proxy firewall.  If that
firewall wasn't in the way, they'd just refuse connection and qmail would
back off to the next MX immediately.

> Tell them to fix their SMTP servers, don't work around their
> breakage.

If anyone is broken here, its my firewall, not their mail setup.  No
one here LIKES their mail setup, but that doesn't make it broken; it
conforms with all relevant RFCs that I'm aware of.

-- 
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

"." in an email address

[Eric Davis]

I'm probably brain farting really badly today, but here goes a question.
I have a client who wants to do an email address like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and qmail is refusing to deliver to the mailbox.  I am using alias files
to redirect the email to the right account such that the alias file
a-who.am.i has the value of [EMAIL PROTECTED]

For all other users on the system, none of them using periods in their
email box names, email works great. This one user is the only blemish
though on our system.  Did I miss something basic in the setup of qmail
or will this not work?  Any help in solving this is greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much in advance.

-Eric Davis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

US encyrption laws relaxed - way to go Dan!

[Brian D. Kohl]

See it in Forbes, a huge relaxing of the US encyrption laws, and a quote
from the CEO of my company, Chemconnect! as well a paragraph on Bernstein.

Way cool.

http://www.forbes.com/tool/html/99/Sep/0916/mu3.htm

Re: "." in an email address

[Tomasz Papszun]

On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 at 17:33:00 -0400, Eric Davis wrote:
> I'm probably brain farting really badly today, but here goes a question.
> I have a client who wants to do an email address like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and qmail is refusing to deliver to the mailbox.  I am using alias files
> to redirect the email to the right account such that the alias file
> a-who.am.i has the value of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> For all other users on the system, none of them using periods in their
> email box names, email works great. This one user is the only blemish
> though on our system.  Did I miss something basic in the setup of qmail
> or will this not work?  Any help in solving this is greatly appreciated.
> Thank you very much in advance.


>From the FAQ:

4.6. How do I create aliases with dots? I tried setting up
~alias/.qmail-P.D.Q.Bach, but it doesn't do anything.

Answer: Use .qmail-p:d:q:bach. Dots are converted to colons, and
uppercase is converted to lowercase.

-- 
 Tomasz Papszun   SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland  | And it's only
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.lodz.tpsa.pl/   | ones and zeros.

Re: "." in an email address

[Russell Nelson]

Eric Davis writes:
 > I'm probably brain farting really badly today, but here goes a question.
 > I have a client who wants to do an email address like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > and qmail is refusing to deliver to the mailbox.  I am using alias files
 > to redirect the email to the right account such that the alias file
 > a-who.am.i has the value of [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Try this:

echo '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >~alias/.qmail-who:am:i

When a filename is constructed, dots are replaced with colons.  This
prevents tricks with ../../../, while still allowing the use of
".qmail-foo/bar".

-- 
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | can outdo them. Homeschool!

RE: When will qmail back off to the next MX?

[Lyndon Griffin]

> If Qmail did it "the same way", it would make Qmail more
> acceptable to users.

Ouch - even that one is beyond me ;)

If qmail did anything the same way as other MTA's ---  well, I'm not so sure
I can express it.  We're here because qmail doesn't do anything like other
MTA's - it's one of qmail's most redeeming qualities.

<:)  Lyndon Grifin

RE: When will qmail back off to the next MX?

[Greg Owen]

> I was provided some information on how to modify the Qmail 
> code to address this issue, but being a non-programmer, I
> decided not to go butchering the code.  Here's the details...

Karl,

I've looked through qmail-remote.c and, the long and short of it is,
the design makes it extremely difficult to modify the behavior  of qmail to
accomodate this combination of problems.  The code snippet you listed won't
do it; if the connection is dropped, smtpcode() will never return to allow
that snippet to execute.

I guess I'm off to natter at the firewall people to see if they can
modify the behavior of the firewall.  

-- 
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: US encyrption laws relaxed - way to go Dan!

[craig]

>See it in Forbes, a huge relaxing of the US encyrption laws, and a quote
>from the CEO of my company, Chemconnect! as well a paragraph on Bernstein.
>
>Way cool.
>
>http://www.forbes.com/tool/html/99/Sep/0916/mu3.htm

Way to go Dan indeed!

And way to perform some useful truth-detecting, John Gilmore!  (His quote
appears at the end of the article.  I hope his fears turn out to be
unfounded.)

tq vm, (burley)

Re: US encyrption laws relaxed - way to go Dan!

[hsilver]

 http://www.wired.com/news

 W I R E D   N E W S
 - - - - - - - - - -

 Decoding the Crypto Policy Change
 by Declan McCullagh

 Why did the Clinton administration cave on crypto? What caused the 
nation's top generals and cops to back down this week after spending 
the better part of a decade warning Congress of the dangers of privacy
-protecting encryption products?

 Why would attorney general Janet Reno inexplicably change her mind 
and embrace overseas sales of encryption when as recently as July she 
warned Congress of the "rising threat from the criminal community of 
commercially available encryption?"

 See also: Clinton Relaxes Crypto Exports and Crypto Law: Little Guy 
Loses

 It can't simply be that tech firms were pressing forward this fall 
with a House floor vote to relax export rules. National security and 
law enforcement backers in the Senate could easily filibuster the 
measure. Besides, Clinton had threatened to veto it.

 It could be the presidential ambitions of Vice President Gore, who 
just happened to be in Silicon Valley around the time of the White 
House press conference Thursday. Still, while tech CEOs can get angry 
over the antediluvian crypto regulations Gore has supported, they 
regard Y2K liability and Internet taxation as more important issues.

 Another answer might lie in a little-noticed section of the 
legislation the White House has sent to Congress. It says that during 
civil cases or criminal prosecutions, the Feds can use decrypted 
evidence in court without revealing how they descrambled it.

 "The court shall enter such orders and take such other action as may 
be necessary and appropriate to preserve the confidentiality of the 
technique used by the governmental entity," Section 2716 of the 
proposed Cyberspace Electronic Security Act says.

 There are a few explanations. The most obvious one goes as follows: 
Encryption programs, like other software, can be buggy. The US 
National Security Agency and other supersecret federal codebreakers 
have the billion-dollar budgets and hyper-smart analysts needed to 
unearth the bugs that lurk in commercial products. (As recent events 
have shown, Microsoft Windows and Hotmail have as many security holes 
as a sieve after an encounter with a 12-gauge shotgun.)

 If the Clinton crypto proposal became law, the codebreakers' 
knowledge could be used to decipher communications or introduce 
decrypted messages during a trial.

 "Most crypto products are insecure. They have bugs. They have them 
all the time. The NSA and the FBI will be working even harder to find 
them," says John Gilmore, a veteran programmer and board member of the
Electronic Frontier Foundation.

 Providing additional evidence for that view are Reno's comments on 
Thursday. When asked why she signed onto a deal that didn't seem to 
provide many obvious benefits to law enforcement, she had a ready 
response.

 "[The bill covers] the protection of methods used so that ... we will
not have to reveal them in one matter and be prevented, therefore, 
from using them in the next matter that comes along," the attorney 
general said.

 Funding for codebreaking and uncovering security holes also gets a 
boost. The White House has recommended US$80 million be allocated to 
an FBI technical center that it says will let police respond "to the 
increasing use of encryption by criminals."

 Anther reason for the sea change on crypto is decidedly more 
conspiratorial. But it has backers among civil libertarians and a 
former NSA analyst who told Wired News the explanation was "likely."

 It says that since the feds will continue to have control of legal 
encryption exports, and since they can stall a license application for
years and cost a company millions in lost sales, the US government has
a sizeable amount of leverage. The Commerce Department and NSA could 
simply pressure a firm to insert flaws into its encryption products 
with a back door for someone who knows how to pick the lock.

 Under the current and proposed new regulations, the NSA conducts a 
technical analysis of the product a company wishes to export. 
According to cryptographers who have experienced the process, it 
usually takes a few months and involves face-to-face meetings with NSA
officials.

 "This may be a recipe for government-industry collusion, to build 
back doors into encryption products," says David Sobel, general 
counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center and a veteran 
litigator.

 Sobel points to another part of the proposed law to bolster his claim
: It says any such information that a company whispers to the Feds 
will remain secret.

 That section "generally prohibits the government from disclosing 
trade secrets disclosed to it [by a company] to assist it in obtaining
access to information protected by encryption," according to a summary
prepared by the administration.

 Is there precedent? You bet. Just this month, a debate flared over 
whether or not Microsoft put a b

Re: ANNOUNCE: /var/qmail/control/locals and regex

[Russell Nelson]

Robert Sander writes:
 > Hi!
 > 
 > There is now a webpage for the regex-patch at
 > 
 > http://beteigeuze.cs.tu-berlin.de/linux/qmail/

What problem does this solve that a virtualdomain does not?  Yes,
control/locals allows only literal entries, but control/virtualdomains 
allows wildcards of the form ".foo.bar:piffle" to match "biff.foo.bar".
It also allows "baz.foo.bar:" to *not* be caught by the preceding entry.

-- 
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | can outdo them. Homeschool!

Re: locals and regex

[Robert Sander]

Hi!

So this must be worked out in the docs, or?

Greetings
-- 
Robert Sander   "Is it Friday yet?"
  @Home http://home.pages.de/~gurubert
pgp available there

Re: Default time for server UTC?

[Joseph R. Junkin]

Well, my disk crashed last night and I had to rebuild the machine from
the ground up. Took about 8 hours with RH 6, It has been a while since I
configured bind and qmail.

I see that there is now a tcpserver version of pop3, great, no need for
inetd at all now!

Thank god I have beeen archiving this mailing list, it is like having my
own personal tech support. I was able to search back and find the answer
to every problem I had.

My server time problem should be fixed now.

Thanks to all on this list!

Joe Junkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sam wrote:
> 
> Joseph R. Junkin writes:
> 
> > Sam wrote:
> > > That's because your time and timezone settings are woefully broken.
> >
> > Yes, I have a PST time, yet my 'date' shows system timezone is EST.
> >
> > So I just set my time and timezone correctly. You are saying Qmail
> > doesn't care what timezone I am in, as long as the time is correct.
> >
> > Now the time is correct on my server and my problem should now be fixed!
> 
> No it's not.  Your message was dated 3:13PM.
> 
> --
> Sam

Re: US encyrption laws relaxed - way to go Dan!

[Vince Vielhaber]

On 17-Sep-99 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>See it in Forbes, a huge relaxing of the US encyrption laws, and a quote
>>from the CEO of my company, Chemconnect! as well a paragraph on Bernstein.
>>
>>Way cool.
>>
>>http://www.forbes.com/tool/html/99/Sep/0916/mu3.htm
> 
> Way to go Dan indeed!
> 
> And way to perform some useful truth-detecting, John Gilmore!  (His quote
> appears at the end of the article.  I hope his fears turn out to be
> unfounded.)
> 
> tq vm, (burley)

Wired seemed to have a slightly different take, but I stopped reading the
Forbes article before I got to Gilmore's comment.

http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/21790.html

Vince.
-- 
==
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH   email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   flame-mail: /dev/null
   # includeTEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directoryhttp://www.camping-usa.com
   Online Giftshop Superstorehttp://www.cloudninegifts.com
==

Re: US encyrption laws relaxed - way to go Dan!

[craig]

>Wired seemed to have a slightly different take, but I stopped reading the
>Forbes article before I got to Gilmore's comment.
>
>http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/21790.html

I think that's the article forwarded to this list that I just read
earlier.  A Gilmore comment was in that article as well.  Wired
didn't strike me as having a different take so much as a vastly
more detailed, in-depth article, including plenty of historical
information, allegations of conspiracies of various sorts, and
so on.

Personally, it's kinda weird -- I'm happy to have qmail up and
running, even though it probably never deals with more than 300
emails in a day.  I'm delighted with the more positive, freedom-
oriented aspects of this crypto development, even though I don't
really ever use crypto myself.  And I support the Second Amendment,
even though I don't like guns.

I guess I just really appreciate the efforts of others to preserve
my freedoms, even ones I have little or no intention of ever exercising.

Again, thanks, Dan!

tq vm, (burley)

Re: US encyrption laws relaxed - way to go Dan!

[Vince Vielhaber]

On 17-Sep-99 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Wired seemed to have a slightly different take, but I stopped reading the
>>Forbes article before I got to Gilmore's comment.
>>
>>http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/21790.html
> 
> I think that's the article forwarded to this list that I just read
> earlier.  A Gilmore comment was in that article as well.  Wired
> didn't strike me as having a different take so much as a vastly
> more detailed, in-depth article, including plenty of historical
> information, allegations of conspiracies of various sorts, and
> so on.

That's what I thought when I first saw it posted, but it's a different
article with a different slant.  It is referenced in the one posted tho.

Vince.
-- 
==
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH   email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   flame-mail: /dev/null
   # includeTEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directoryhttp://www.camping-usa.com
   Online Giftshop Superstorehttp://www.cloudninegifts.com
==

SMTP AUTH ?

[John R Levine]

Has anyone tried to add SMTP AUTH to the qmail SMTP daemon?  I hear from an
extremely reliable source that sendmail 8.10 will have it, so it seems like
for better or worse this will be the way that people solve the roaming user
problem. 

Regards,
John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner
Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4  2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 

Re: SMTP AUTH ?

[Scott Ellis]

There is a patch that adds AUTH capabilities on www.nimh.org.  Works great
for me, been running it for awhile now.

Scott

- Original Message -
From: "John R Levine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "qmail list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 2:59 PM
Subject: SMTP AUTH ?


> Has anyone tried to add SMTP AUTH to the qmail SMTP daemon?  I hear from
an
> extremely reliable source that sendmail 8.10 will have it, so it seems
like
> for better or worse this will be the way that people solve the roaming
user
> problem.
>
> Regards,
> John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for
Dummies",
> Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer
Commissioner
> Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4  2D AC 1E 9E A6 36
A3 47
>
>

Message time/dates

[Paul Farber]

Hello all, 

I've been getting a few calls about times and dates on e-mails.

Ex, just got a call and the lady said that it's taking two days to get her
mail from AOL... the e-mail header she read to me said the mail was
recieved on 9/12 at 15:38... but it took two additional days to show up in
her inbox as the time/date the showed up in Outlook express was 9/14 (not
in the headers just on the diplay). I said the she may not have
checked the mail for two days (as the header said I recvd 2 days prior)..
she insists that there is a problem.

Any ideas??

Paul D. Farber II
Farber Technology
Ph. 570-628-5303
Fax 570-628-5545
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: When will qmail back off to the next MX?

[phil]

Russell Nelson wrote:

> A host that persistently refuses to run the SMTP protocol on the SMTP
> port cannot be said to be running SMTP.

So why not fall back to another one that does?

> Tell them to fix their SMTP servers, don't work around their
> breakage.

Isn't the design philosophy of the Internet supposed to be one where it is
desireable to work around breakage?

-- 
Phil Howard | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  phil  | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  at| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ipal  | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 dot| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  net   | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How do you set the From and Received: line dates to match the one in the Date: line ?

[Cyril Bitterich]

Hi Ric,

> Anyway, The email headers generated for the From line
> and the Received: line are 7 Hours ahead of the actual
> time sent.  The Date: line shows the correct time.

As far as I know you are 7 hours behind GMT. 

> >>Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 12:56:33 -0700

And Q-Mail just takes UTC as a timestamp. As you can see from the Header
of my mail there seems to be the same problem. But why should I try to
read your local time and wonder how the message could be delivered
before it was even sent?

Ciao,

Cyril

Re: When will qmail back off to the next MX?

[phil]

Racer X wrote:

> so qmail is within its "legal" boundaries in the way it handles MX records.
> without an RFC that specifies different behaviors for different situations,
> MX handling will always be a gray area.  for instance:

Would it be within its "legal" boundaries to handle it differently in ways
some have suggested?

> * if the primary host gives you a temporary error, should you fall back to
> the next MX?  how fast, immediately or wait a while?  if you wait a while,
> maybe the temporary error will go away?

Make it configurable.

> * what if a fallback gives you a temp error?  should you reset your MX
> preference to the primary?  how soon?

Make it configurable.

> * if any host gives you a permanent error, should you try all other hosts?
> (this may be answered in some rfc, i dunno)

Make it configurable.

> * there's clearly a difference between a "connect refused", "host not
> responding", "host answers but disconnects without notice", all these kind
> of error conditions.  how should they be handled wrt MX?

Make it configurable.

> * how often do you check for an updated MX list?  every time you send the
> mail?  if so, should you keep track of what the preferences used to be?

Make it configurable.

> an RFC would be the ideal way to answer these.  doing it "like everyone else
> does" isn't valid.  doing it "the way sendmail does" is even worse.

Agreed.  But in some cases I have found things can work better by violating
RFCs.  I don't like to distribute software that violates the RFCs, unless it
would do so only if the administrator gets to choose to do so, and is aware
that such a choice is a violation.  I have no qualms about distributing or
using any software that works that way.

> btw, in case you weren't aware, your "make qmail more acceptable to users"
> argument isn't going to impress people around here.

Sounds like the debate I have with the FreeBSD people over their refusal to
support ATAPI devices attaced as master on an IDE channel just because the
specifications described it as a slave device ... at a time before secondary
IDE was common place (Linux and MS Windows work fine with master ATAPI).

Sticking to standards does have an important purpose.  Deviating from them
should never be done lightly.  But it should not be ruled out, either.  In
many cases, such deviations have to be done to fully evaluate a proposed
change in the standards.  And sometimes, old standards are not re-visited
because de-factor standards born out of deviant usage have established
themselves and there is no pressure to formalize them when other standards
work is more pressing.

There is also another saying common in computers and networking, especially
in regard to conformance to standards:  Be conservative in what you produce
and be liberal in what you accept.

I have interpreted that to mean that if something does not conform to the
standard, but I also don't have to go out of my way to detect and understand
what is meant, I _may_ (and some would like this to be _should_) go ahead
and accept it with the obvious semantics.

I don't know of any protocol that specifically says that accepting a
connection and then summarily dropping it with no output has any particular
meaning in that standard.  But I would readily classify this as a failure
not unlike a connection refusal.  I recognize this because I happen to know
that there are cases where this is unavoidable.  One example is that the
UNIX socket API is a deficient standard for lacking the ability to allow
user space processes to act on an incoming connection in a way that is seen
as a connection refusal.

If you can write a "bounce/relay" type of program that listens on a port and
for each connection coming in, connects to another specified host and port,
and passes all traffic both ways, but in the case of a connection refusal by
the target host, gives a connection refusal to the incoming connection it
gets, then I am proven wrong (and will have use for your code).

People want things that work well and work right.  Unfortunately there is
disagreement on what both of those things mean.  I see both sendmail and
qmail as fitting neither, but qmail is closer.  In choosing which mail
server I will run on the new servers I am working on, I have to evaulate how
easy or difficult it will be to make things work as I need them to work. 
I've probably ruled out FreeBSD (but I will see if 4.0 fixes things).  I
have not ruled out qmail at all because qmail is probably easy to hack.  But
indeed, this issue has added to what I will need to do with qmail to make it
"workable" (as I define it).

-- 
Phil Howard | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  phil  | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  at| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ipal  | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 dot| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  net   | [EMAIL PROTEC

Re: "." in an email address

[phil]

Russell Nelson wrote:

> echo '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >~alias/.qmail-who:am:i
> 
> When a filename is constructed, dots are replaced with colons.  This
> prevents tricks with ../../../, while still allowing the use of
> ".qmail-foo/bar".

Do the slashes get translated, or can they be used to do tricks with
subdirectories?

-- 
Phil Howard | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  phil  | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  at| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ipal  | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 dot| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  net   | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: When will qmail back off to the next MX?

[Russell Nelson]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 > Russell Nelson wrote:
 > 
 > > A host that persistently refuses to run the SMTP protocol on the SMTP
 > > port cannot be said to be running SMTP.
 > 
 > So why not fall back to another one that does?

Because you claimed that it was speaking SMTP.  Upon examination, it
isn't.  Your MX records are false.  Why should I send your server any
mail at all, since it may not be the right server at all?

 > > Tell them to fix their SMTP servers, don't work around their
 > > breakage.
 > 
 > Isn't the design philosophy of the Internet supposed to be one where it is
 > desireable to work around breakage?

Nope, because if you do that, people never notice the breakage.  If
something is working (even if it takes special efforts to keep it
working, e.g. contacting the wrong host first), they quite reasonably
conclude that it isn't broken, and they don't fix it.

-- 
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | can outdo them. Homeschool!

Re: "." in an email address

[Russell Nelson]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 > Russell Nelson wrote:
 > > When a filename is constructed, dots are replaced with colons.  This
 > > prevents tricks with ../../../, while still allowing the use of
 > > ".qmail-foo/bar".
 > 
 > Do the slashes get translated, or can they be used to do tricks with
 > subdirectories?

The latter, except that they look funny.  You have to have a
subdirectory named .qmail-foo, and you put dot-qmail commands in a
file named bar.  And the extension is foo/bar, so you have to send
mail to user-foo/bar.

-- 
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | can outdo them. Homeschool!

http://pobox.com/~djb/ezmlm.html

[Mark Thomas]

I am trying to setup qmail for the first time.  Being a newbie to Linux, I
need all of the help I can get.  I keep seing references to this, but I
cannot see anything under pobox.com/.

I even got this message after signing up to this mailing list.
See http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail.html for more information about qmail.
Please read http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail/faq.html before sending your
question to the qmail mailing list.

I use a pobox.com address myself, and have never seen any reference to qmail
out there?  I have tried several html documents from the Qmail.org home page
that points there that are not available.
Anybody have any clues.  I can get to pobox.com and login and change my
redirects, passwords, etc.  Getting to the pobox.com server is not a
problem.
Also Setting up User Masquerading, mentions adding statements to your
environment.  Is this one of the .files in my home directory?


MarkT.

Re: When will qmail back off to the next MX?

[phil]

Russell Nelson wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>  > Russell Nelson wrote:
>  > 
>  > > A host that persistently refuses to run the SMTP protocol on the SMTP
>  > > port cannot be said to be running SMTP.
>  > 
>  > So why not fall back to another one that does?
> 
> Because you claimed that it was speaking SMTP.  Upon examination, it
> isn't.  Your MX records are false.  Why should I send your server any
> mail at all, since it may not be the right server at all?

If it isn't speaking SMTP right then, it's BROKEN right then.  But that's
no different than if it isn't accepting connections right then, which is
also a case of it's BROKEN right then.

Either way it's BROKEN right then.

Now you can just requeue the mail and try again later.  If you do, then
you are presuming that perhaps it will be fixed later on, but before the
expiration of the mail.

So why not send the mail on to at least the WORKING secondary MX?  That
at least gets it out of your queue, putting the storage burden on whoever
is supposedly doing queueing service for the crappy server.


>  > > Tell them to fix their SMTP servers, don't work around their
>  > > breakage.
>  > 
>  > Isn't the design philosophy of the Internet supposed to be one where it is
>  > desireable to work around breakage?
> 
> Nope, because if you do that, people never notice the breakage.  If
> something is working (even if it takes special efforts to keep it
> working, e.g. contacting the wrong host first), they quite reasonably
> conclude that it isn't broken, and they don't fix it.

How is it that people won't notice the breakage if the primary mail server
isn't accepting mail?  If the server accepts connections, and then keeps
closing them, it's not going to get its mail even from then secondary MX.

I think they will eventually notice they are not getting their mail if it
disconnects just the same as if it was refusing connections.


Doesn't this really come down to a difference between the WAY a mail server
is broken?  But I'm not seeing any argument about why the WAY it is broken
is more important than merely the fact that it is broken.

-- 
Phil Howard | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  phil  | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  at| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ipal  | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 dot| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  net   | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: http://pobox.com/~djb/ezmlm.html

[Chris Johnson]

On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 01:54:40AM -0500, Mark Thomas wrote:
> I am trying to setup qmail for the first time.  Being a newbie to Linux, I
> need all of the help I can get.  I keep seing references to this, but I
> cannot see anything under pobox.com/.
> 
> I even got this message after signing up to this mailing list.
> See http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail.html for more information about qmail.
> Please read http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail/faq.html before sending your
> question to the qmail mailing list.

Just follow these instructions literally. Don't try to "see anything under
pobox.com," whatever that might mean. Access the cited URLs, and there you will
find the desired information. 

Chris