qmail-queue patch
Hi all can anybody tell me how can i apply qmail-queue patch on existing running qmail-1.03, qmail patch ois available on qmail.org site but i don't know how to aply that , bcoz its neither a tar file nor a rpm, So could u pl help me in applying that regards lokesh
qmail Digest 28 Oct 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 1167
qmail Digest 28 Oct 2000 10:00:01 - Issue 1167 Topics (messages 51163 through 51251): moving a part of my queue to a ramdisk ? 51163 by: Nicolas Deslions 51174 by: Charles Cazabon 51183 by: Sean Reifschneider 51224 by: James R Grinter Re: What to do about these barelinefeeds? 51164 by: Hubbard, David 51216 by: Markus Stumpf how to modified the send datetime? 51165 by: SJ 51166 by: Frank Tegtmeyer Refuse large mails with multiple RCPTs 51167 by: Oliver Hitz unsubscribing from qmail list a project in itself 51168 by: McGillicuddy, Dennis 51189 by: Dave Sill 51201 by: Andy Bradford NO CONFIG-FAST Script 51169 by: Anthony Abby 51175 by: Charles Cazabon 51178 by: Anthony Abby 51179 by: Chris Johnson Re: Documentation Specialist Seeking Contract Work 51170 by: Dave Kitabjian 51173 by: Anthony Abby 51180 by: Vince Vielhaber 51184 by: Brett Randall Resending large bulks of mail! 51171 by: Wilson, Frank 51176 by: Charles Cazabon 51196 by: Andy Bradford Re: Question about OpenBSD and FD_SET() 51172 by: Collin B. McClendon unsubscribe qmail 51177 by: Mike Brown 51186 by: Scott Sanders 51190 by: Brett Randall 51197 by: Landon Evans 51199 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes 51207 by: Brett Randall 51209 by: Robin S. Socha 51212 by: Jeremy Stanley 51220 by: Adam McKenna 51227 by: Kris Kelley 51233 by: David Dyer-Bennet 51235 by: Adam McKenna 51237 by: markd.bushwire.net 51242 by: Andy Bradford 51243 by: Andy Bradford 51245 by: janjan 51246 by: Ricardo Cerqueira 51248 by: David Dyer-Bennet SMTP/POP3 problems 51181 by: jahall.nea.org 51206 by: Timothy Legant 51214 by: Alexander Jernejcic error compiling qmail Suse 6.4 51182 by: Schwarz Hans-Juergen 51194 by: Clemens Hermann Re: User password change using web. Suggestions? 51185 by: Sean Reifschneider 51191 by: Wesley Wannemacher SPAM - Help! 51187 by: Ari Arantes Filho 51192 by: Tim Hunter 51193 by: markd.bushwire.net 51202 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes 51203 by: Tim Hunter 51204 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes 51205 by: Mira Tempir 51215 by: markd.bushwire.net 51217 by: markd.bushwire.net 51218 by: Clemens Hermann 51221 by: Markus Stumpf 51225 by: markd.bushwire.net 51226 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes 51229 by: micha.network.ecore.net Re: QMail RPM buggy... 51188 by: Sean Reifschneider Re: Is there a bug in the pop3 server? 51195 by: Peter van Dijk Seamless e-mail virus scanner? 51198 by: Bill Parker 51210 by: Brett Randall 51211 by: Brian Johnson 51234 by: Robin S. Socha Re: unsubscribe 51200 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes 51208 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes 51213 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes Re: Queuing outgoing PPP mail to multiple ISPs 51219 by: Wm is there any way to move messages to the front of qmail's queue? 51222 by: Greg Jorgensen How many outbound messages can you send per hour? 51223 by: Greg Jorgensen 51230 by: markd.bushwire.net 51232 by: Austad, Jay Per user RBL or RSS 51228 by: Robert J. Adams 51247 by: Ricardo Cerqueira quick question on queuing mails 51231 by: marlon abao (TS-US) 51236 by: markd.bushwire.net Problem with sqwebmail + qmail-scanner 51238 by: davi.avati.com.br 51244 by: Andy Bradford 51250 by: Einar Bordewich Queued messages not sending (error #4.1.1) 51239 by: Something Unusual How to customize bounced back messages 51240 by: Yu Wang problem with supervise 51241 by: Chris Hackman fixcrio 51249 by: Austad, Jay qmail-queue patch 51251 by: lkhanna.hughes-ecomm.com Administrivia: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To bug my human owner, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post to the list, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Hi I'm running a fbsd/qmail system with around 500 concurrent qmail-remote processes. The problem now is the speed on my raid system... it's not fast enough to handle all the incoming mails and i get the not yet preprocessed growing fast. I'm thinking about using a 500Mb ramdisk on /var/qmail/queue/todo Anyone already done something like that or does it seems stupid ? ;p Nicolas Deslions System, network and security admin Net2one.com, France 20 rue du Sentier 75002 Paris Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.net2one.com
fetchmail and timers and control-dir
Hi All !! I have some problems to deliver mail from fetchmail to qmail. I tried some option with the -mua -switch, but without success. I have to deliver the fetched mail in that way, that I can recieve it via pop3 from other clients, any ideas ? an other problem ist, that I dont know how to modify some timerparameters (interval of sending mail for example) can you tell me, where I have to modify it ? thanks a lot ! yours romeo -- " R o m e o K i e n z l e r " Am Grosshausberg 2-9-3 78120 Furtwangen Fon 0170/6015062 Fax 01805/05255377249 email [EMAIL PROTECTED] "www.ormium.de"
people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Hi all I have now gotten spam to two of my adresses that i have only used publicly on this list. is there any chance that the list's admin would consider removing the header info that shows the adress of the sender before sending it on to the list? /Martin
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
"Martin" == Martin Jespersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Martin Hi all I have now gotten spam to two of my adresses that i Martin have only used publicly on this list. Ditto...and only in the last month. I am getting some degree of spam now. Martin is there any chance that the list's admin would consider Martin removing the header info that shows the adress of the sender Martin before sending it on to the list? I wouldn't recommend this...how then can we do personal replies when a list reply is not necessary? We will have to do it usenet-style and put "Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove _nospam)" in our signature files. Lucky for us Gnus users we can make those be processed automatically, but it is still messy. A better alternative, IMHO, is to use a certain anti-spam e-mail address (someone on this list uses it but I can't remember who) that only lasts like a week, and then its gone. This gives most ppl enuf time to reply. This won't cut down your bandwidth, however, but it will cut down the spam in your inbox (instead of getting bigger and bigger, it will remain constantly low). That's my few words for the day... -- "Give no sleep to your eyes, Nor slumber to your eyelids." - Proverbs 6:4, NKJV
RE: fixcrio
hi, i am using a little shell-wrapper: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtp.sh: #!/bin/bash /usr/local/bin/fixcr | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd and call it with tcpserver instead of qmail-smtpd. just one way of doing it... ;) a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: Austad, Jay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 4:10 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: fixcrio I'm calling tcpserver with this line: tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 I need to use fixcrio to fix stupid emailers that put stray lf's in their messages. How do I integrate fixcrio into this? Do I just do: tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/fixcrio | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 Jay
RE: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
hi, only for my interest: was this from Money Maker [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? i received that today. ;) a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: Martin Jespersen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 1:21 PM To: Qmail mailing list Subject: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list... Hi all I have now gotten spam to two of my adresses that i have only used publicly on this list. is there any chance that the list's admin would consider removing the header info that shows the adress of the sender before sending it on to the list? /Martin
Re: is there any way to move messages to the front of qmail's queue?
Greg Jorgensen wrote: Sometimes we have our mail server busy sending out a lot of newsletters. While it's doing that any other mail sent through the server has to wait in the queue. Is there any way to tell qmail that some messages should be processed and sent before others? Thanks. As far as I am aware - No. we use Two queues and two implementations if we want faster mail for certain things - as one queue is nearlly always buzy sending newsletters as well. Greg = Greg Jorgensen Deschooling Society Portland, Oregon, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/
Re: is there any way to move messages to the front of qmail's queue?
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 11:38:50AM +, Greg Cope wrote: Greg Jorgensen wrote: Sometimes we have our mail server busy sending out a lot of newsletters. While it's doing that any other mail sent through the server has to wait in the queue. Is there any way to tell qmail that some messages should be processed and sent before others? Thanks. As far as I am aware - No. Just an idea: what about "touching" the file in the queue, with a timestamp higher than any other mail in the queue ? (not tested) Olivier -- _ Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch - http://webmail.omnis.ch PGP signature
Re: qmail-queue patch
It's officailly documented as this : root:/usr/local/src/qmail-1.03# patch -p1 /path/to/qmail-103.patch from the qmail-howto. But this command did not work for me, who knows, maybe I did something wrong. regards chris
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Alexander Jernejcic wrote: hi, only for my interest: was this from Money Maker [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? i received that today. ;) a YUP! cheers, jamie ps maybe I should start including all spam-email addresses I have received in the past in my signature so they could harvest their own crap into themselves :) but OTHO, that will probably create mass havoc too, since most of the sources wont resolve to a legit mailbox. gee, i don't know... Received: from Money (adsl-214-23-94.asm.bellsouth.net [209.214.23.94]) [snip] Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 20:42:24 +0900 (JST) From: Money Maker [EMAIL PROTECTED] #-#-#-#-#-#-#-# -- If somebody can help create a search engine for my room, I will call them a Saint... GUI == Graphical User Interference
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 10:28:51PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote: Martin is there any chance that the list's admin would consider Martin removing the header info that shows the adress of the sender Martin before sending it on to the list? I wouldn't recommend this...how then can we do personal replies when a list reply is not necessary? We will have to do it usenet-style and put "Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove _nospam)" in our signature files. Lucky for us Gnus users we can make those be processed automatically, but it is still messy. Hmm. Lemme get this right. You're telling me that people modify their email addresses so that spammers cannot automatically harvest them yet you then say that Gnus has code that automatically processes them? Are all harvester programmers too dumb to make this connection? I doubt it. In other words I'm sceptical of some of these strategies. If I were a harvest programmer I'd be more than happy to slice and dice such addresses to get all reasonable permutations. If a harvest gets a few bogus addresses out of it, do they care? I doubt it. A better alternative, IMHO, is to use a certain anti-spam e-mail address (someone on this list uses it but I can't remember who) that only lasts like a week, and then its gone. This gives most ppl enuf Indeed this is an excellent strategy - if done properly. The problem is, a lot of people don't have the ability to capture all addresses in a domain - and of course user-random@domain is trivially defeated by a competent slicer and dicer if user@domain is valid. So this strategy only truly works for personal domains. time to reply. This won't cut down your bandwidth, however, but it If you can control your DNS you can apply a similar strategy to your domain by generating a reply address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] where @domain is not a valid mail target. But again, the number of people who have the opportunity, or capability to do this, are low. Regards.
qmail-local killed
Hi, My redhat6.2 + qmail(rpm) box was panic and I saw this line in syslog. Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: Bad pmd in pte_alloc: 448b5008 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: VM: killing process qmail-local Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 1309a3ce Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: current-tss.cr3 = 154ea000, %cr3 = 154ea000 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: *pde = Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: Oops: 0002 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: CPU:0 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: EIP:0010:[move_addr_to_kernel+30/56] Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: EFLAGS: 00010202 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: eax: 1309a3ce ebx: cddcdf6c ecx: d8b43f10 edx: 0003 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: esi: d8b43f14 edi: 006e ebp: ba6c esp: d8b43ef8 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: Process ls (pid: 23074, process nr: 145, stackpage=d8b43000) Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: Stack: b9fc 006e d8b43f14 0002 0003 4010cd60 02a8 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel:cddcdf6c c6a17a00 c0173a14 c0173a74 0282 cddcded0 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel:c01308a0 df4ca800 c01df0a4 0001 cddcded0 df4ca7a0 cddcded0 Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: Call Trace: [unix_create1+60/163] [unix_create1+156/163] [d_alloc+110/279][cprt+388/23488] [d_alloc_root+49/57] [get_fd+53/147] [sys_socket+51/115] Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel:[sys_socketcall+130/440] [error_code+45/52] [system_call+52/56] Oct 10 15:36:12 member kernel: Code: 10 00 24 14 50 e8 0d b7 08 00 83 c4 0c 85 c0 74 06 b8 f2 ff What should I do ? It happen 2 times a month. Do I have a problem with my RAM ? (I use 512Mb) I also got this from the syslog.please help me. Oct 10 22:10:18 member kernel: Uhhuh. NMI received. Dazed and confused, but trying to continue Oct 10 22:10:18 member kernel: You probably have a hardware problem with your RAM chips Joomy.
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
"markd" == markd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: markd Hmm. Lemme get this right. You're telling me that people markd modify their email addresses so that spammers cannot markd automatically harvest them yet you then say that Gnus has code markd that automatically processes them? Are all harvester markd programmers too dumb to make this connection? I doubt it. Well, true, some harvester programmers have half a grain of sense somewhere in their rotten minds that allows them to use a whole lot of regex's to defeat regular nospam e-mail addresses which people like myself modify automatically through our MUA when we reply. But there is no reason someone can't put "Reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove biteme from domain)" in their sig which is totally unusual, and annoying to have to cut and edit for a personal reply, but it works. And since you but in a fake domain it bites the pants off the people sending the spam... I would put up with people using this method since I understand the frustations of spam... A better alternative, IMHO, is to use a certain anti-spam e-mail address (someone on this list uses it but I can't remember who) that only lasts like a week, and then its gone. This gives most ppl enuf markd Indeed this is an excellent strategy - if done properly. The markd problem is, a lot of people don't have the ability to capture markd all addresses in a domain - and of course user-random@domain markd is trivially defeated by a competent slicer and dicer if markd user@domain is valid. So this strategy only truly works for markd personal domains. Here's a crazy idea: And it puts the pressure on crap MUA's, too :) Use the user-random@domain format, but have the e-mail piped through a command that checks the References in the e-mail, and if it contains a valid reference to an e-mail that was posted from your own mail relay, then it passes it, otherwise, it bounces it (or trashes it). How does that sound? Have I missed anything? time to reply. This won't cut down your bandwidth, however, but it markd If you can control your DNS you can apply a similar strategy markd to your domain by generating a reply address of markd [EMAIL PROTECTED] where @domain is not a valid mail markd target. But again, the number of people who have the markd opportunity, or capability to do this, are low. True, but there are domain hosters out there who will host your domain for $99 per year (sorry I don't know their names, I just remember coming across them on occasion) that will let you modify your DNS at will. Not as elegant as your own BIND server (which is what I have, and I highly advise it for anyone serious about control), but if you can work out some type of automation, it could do the job. Regards -- "Win95 not found, [P]arty, [C]elebrate, [D]rink ?"
Re: qmail-local killed
"Joomy" == Joomy Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Joomy Oct 10 22:10:18 member kernel: Uhhuh. NMI received. Dazed and Joomy confused, but trying to continue Joomy Oct 10 22:10:18 member kernel: You probably have a hardware Joomy problem with your RAM chips I'd say this is a pretty good explanation of your problems... Try pulling a ram chip for a fortnight. If it happens again, pull the next one. Keep doing this until you find the right one (or if you have money just go buy another 512mb). I have had similar troubles (machine crashing) because of faulty ram. Buying new ram fixed it on the spot. Good luck~ -- "I'm not dumb. I just have a command of throughly useless information." - Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes
Re: unsubscribe qmail
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 02:29:11AM +0100, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote:
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 03:39:43PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm. Maybe I'm confused. How do people think the envelope sender
value is determined in the first instant? Eg, how does Eudora go from
a mail in a window to "Mail From: " in SMTP? Or how does qmail-inject
for that matter?
qmail-inject uses environment variables for From (not From:).
What are you talking about? What does "From (not From:)" mean?
If you deduced this from qmail/djb-docs, all of these references
(unless specifically talking about final delivery) mean the "From:"
header. You might care to read cr.yp.to/immhf.htm for a more general
discussion on mail headers.
The only "From" that qmail-inject deals with is "From:". If you think
otherwise show us some output from qmail-inject -n that has this
mysterious "From (not From:)" that you refer to.
If you are referring to the "From " line, this is not a mail header,
that any part of the mail injection deals with. Instead, "From " is a
very poorly defined delimiter in V7 mailboxes that is generated at
final delivery which has nothing to do with injection.
If you still don't believe me and you don't want to bother explain
by demonstration, have a look at this code from qmail-inject.c:
void defaultfrommake()
{
...
df.t[df.len].s = "From";
df.t[df.len].slen = 4;
++df.len;
df.t[df.len].type = TOKEN822_COLON;
It's the only piece of code that has "From" and it looks like "From:" to me.
For those who do not use qmail-inject directly (Like those using remote
SMTP with Eudora, to use your example), the "From" is generated by the MUA.
So yes, those cases are "hopeless". "From:" will almost certainly be the base
for "From"
I think you're confused. There is no "From" that is separate from "From:".
If you think otherwise, inject a mail into qmail via SMTP using a mail client
like Eudora and show us the queue file with this "From" header you refer to.
(Use a target address that cannot be delivered so you can catch the queue
entry).
The answer is that it's mostly derived from a parse of the various
headers in the original mail when it's injected into the MTA. In
many cases the most likely header that will be used to derive the
envelope sender will be the From: header. So to suggest that the
unparsed From: header is a better place to look for the sender
seems a bit silly to me because in many cases the envelope sender is
simply a parsed version of the From: header.
Not really. You can have very odd "From:" lines (with 8bit chars, spaces),
but From is (or should always be) a plain old user@domain string. It's
easier to parse, and probably less prone to error.
Are you sure you're not confusing this discussion with the "From " line
that is generated on delivery into a mailbox? Which by the way *is*
used to stash the envelope sender address, which *is* original derived
from fields like "From: ".
Regards.
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Here's a crazy idea: And it puts the pressure on crap MUA's, too :) Use the user-random@domain format, but have the e-mail piped through a command that checks the References in the e-mail, and if it contains a valid reference to an e-mail that was posted from your own mail relay, then it passes it, otherwise, it bounces it (or trashes it). How does that sound? Have I missed anything? That's not a bad idea. Allbut the original harvester will not have that information - assuming most lists are sold/shared sans original content. As you say, it relies on MUAs faithfully reproducing References. Fortunately for us .qmail types, mess822 provides reliable access to header fields for those who want to implement that idea. Spammers tend not to use the Subject line either, so a little pattern matching would catch that. Though why spammers tend not to use harvested subject lines is beyond me - i think it'd work a lot better than "MAKE MONEY FAST". markd If you can control your DNS you can apply a similar strategy markd to your domain by generating a reply address of markd [EMAIL PROTECTED] where @domain is not a valid mail markd target. But again, the number of people who have the markd opportunity, or capability to do this, are low. True, but there are domain hosters out there who will host your domain for $99 per year (sorry I don't know their names, I just remember coming across them on occasion) that will let you modify your DNS at will. Not as elegant as your own Yep. That'd be a pain as you have to change on something like a weekly, rotation. BIND server (which is what I have, Well heck pardner, round this neck of the woods some people might see them as fightin' words! If you'd said use djbdns, then, well, yes, we'd understand : Regards.
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
"markd" == markd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: markd As you say, it relies on MUAs faithfully reproducing markd References. Fortunately for us .qmail types, mess822 provides markd reliable access to header fields for those who want to markd implement that idea. I might even look into implementing this...but first, what is mess822? :) markd Spammers tend not to use the Subject line either, so a little markd pattern matching would catch that. Though why spammers tend markd not to use harvested subject lines is beyond me - i think it'd markd work a lot better than "MAKE MONEY FAST". Hehe good point, except subject matching is a hard one... You'd have to watch all outgoing mail and capture all subjects that you send. I think References is more failsafe, except crappy clients like Outlook (hehe I can talk coming from an Outlook background :) dump all References headers...but then again considering that I'm on mainly *nix-based groups, anyone that is using Outlook should be shot like I was several times in the past... BIND server (which is what I have, markd Well heck pardner, round this neck of the woods some people markd might see them as fightin' words! If you'd said use djbdns, markd then, well, yes, we'd understand : Hehe I haven't ever used djbdns so the idea didn't occur to me. Apologies DJB fans! -- FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: Press F13 to continue...
Re[2]: unsubscribe qmail
Saturday, October 28, 2000, 3:06:42 PM, you wrote: On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 02:29:11AM +0100, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote: You might care to read cr.yp.to/immhf.htm for a more general discussion on mail headers. HTTP 404 - File not found -- Jarle H. Knudsen
Re: Re[2]: unsubscribe qmail
"Jarle" == Jarle Hammen Knudsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jarle HTTP 404 - File not found Let's see...have we ever tried, just for the sake of it, appending an 'l' to the end of a '.htm' to just see if it works? -- "People say Microsoft payed $14M for using the Rolling Stones song 'Start me up' in their commercials. This is wrong. Microsoft payed $14M only for a part of the song. For instance, they didn't use the line 'You'll make a grown man cry'."
Re: unsubscribe qmail
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 03:45:40PM +0200, Jarle Hammen Knudsen wrote: Saturday, October 28, 2000, 3:06:42 PM, you wrote: On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 02:29:11AM +0100, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote: You might care to read cr.yp.to/immhf.htm for a more general discussion on mail headers. HTTP 404 - File not found Sorry. .html Now wouldn't it be neat if URLs included a checksum and that your MUA only identified them as such if the checksum matched? Blue for a good URL, red for a syntactically correct, my with a checksum error. That would of course then cover mailto: as well! Regards.
Re: How to customize bounced back messages
* Yu Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Suppose Qmail cannot send an email for a user, so it will send back a message to the user telling her (or him) that that message cannot be delivered. How can I customize the returned message so that a non-English speaking user can know what has happened clearly. Create a .qmail-default (catchall "account") containing: |/var/qmail/bin/bouncesaying 'Hier nix diese User, Bruder' or a localized version of the above. If that is not enough, you should consult the manual (i.e. qmail-send.c.). BTW, is there any effort to provide localized Qmail package for non-English speaking users? I mean, if there are some such efforts, Qmail will be expected to have more widespread use. Yup, that would really r00l3. Like, if I went to Switzerland using a Swiss account, qmail would detect that .ch thingy and go "Gruezi, Robin, der User ischt necht do". Ummm... Come to think of it, I could well do without that. Especially thinking of BIG5 or KOI8 bounce messages makes me kinda queasy. YMMV. -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: qmail-queue patch
* lkhanna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: can anybody tell me how can i apply qmail-queue patch on existing running qmail-1.03, qmail patch ois available on qmail.org site but i don't know how to aply that , bcoz its neither a tar file nor a rpm, So could u pl help me in applying that u nd t rd th fckng mn pg fr ptch nd ptch th qml srcs, rcmpl, stp qml nd rnstll. And IYAM, this shorthand thingy is kind hrd t rd. -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
"Brett" == Brett Randall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"Martin" == Martin Jespersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin is there any chance that the list's admin would consider
Martin removing the header info that shows the adress of the sender
Martin before sending it on to the list?
That's a *very* stupid idea.
Brett I wouldn't recommend this...how then can we do personal replies
Brett when a list reply is not necessary?
Not at all. If you want this sort of anonymity, use a remailer or a
trash account.
Brett We will have to do it usenet-style and put "Please reply to
Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove _nospam)" in our signature
Brett files.
Yeah, right...
,
| (defvar js-gnus-nospam-regexp
| (concat "^\\(To\\|Cc\\):[^_]*\\("
| "no\\.spam\\.?\\|"
| "NOSPAM\\.?\\|"
| "_?no.?spam_?\\|"
| "_?remove.?to.?r.?ply_?\\|"
| ".?remove.?"
| "\\)")
| "Used by js-gnus-remove-nospam-from-email-address")
| ;
| (defun js-gnus-remove-nospam-from-email-address ()
| "Remove NOSPAM shit - fuck you, luser..."
| Should be added to message-signature-setup-hook."
| (interactive) ; !?
| (beginning-of-buffer)
| (if (search-forward-regexp js-gnus-nospam-regexp nil t)
| (delete-region (match-beginning 2) (match-end 2)))
| (end-of-buffer)
| )
`
I've got the same for procmail somewhere here. So there.
Brett Lucky for us Gnus users we can make those be processed
Brett automatically, but it is still messy.
Errr... how would you want to that, Brett?
Brett A better alternative, IMHO, is to use a certain anti-spam e-mail
Brett address (someone on this list uses it but I can't remember who)
Brett that only lasts like a week, and then its gone. This gives most
Brett ppl enuf time to reply. This won't cut down your bandwidth,
Brett however, but it will cut down the spam in your inbox (instead of
Brett getting bigger and bigger, it will remain constantly low).
Two major annoyances on the net: people who Bcc: you (man OutlookExpress
for a particularly braindamaged example) and people "answering" after a
couple of years...
,[ .qmail-robin-usenet-default ]
| |/var/qmail/bin/bouncesaying 'I *read* this group, fuckstain...' except iftocc
|usenet-$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| |/var/qmail/bin/bouncesaying 'Time's up, luser...' except ./usenet'
| ./Maildir/
`
where usenet is a small tool that checks for an expired date. Setup
courtesy of Fefe. Then you also need an MUA/NR that can say something
along the lines of (for slrn):
,[ fefe-timer.sl ]
| define make_from_string_hook ()
| {
| variable date;
| date = localtime(_time());
| return sprintf("Robin S. Socha
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]",date.tm_year+1900,date.tm_mon+1,date.tm_mday);
| }
`
Brett That's my few words for the day...
Right. Now, Brett, less talk and more (setq sc-nested-citation-p t).
--
Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: fetchmail and timers and control-dir
* romeo kienzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have some problems to deliver mail from fetchmail to qmail. I tried some option with the -mua -switch, but without success. ,[ Works For Me(tm) ] | server yourserver.com | proto pop3 | | user romeo | pass geheim | | fetchall | flush | mda /usr/bin/procmai ` I have to deliver the fetched mail in that way, that I can recieve it via pop3 from other clients, any ideas ? You need a local pop3d capable of reading maildir, methinks. You /do/ want to fetch from yourserver.com and prostitute the mail to your lusers on ormium.de, right? an other problem ist, that I dont know how to modify some timerparameters (interval of sending mail for example) can you tell me, where I have to modify it ? Have you considered doing cron based thingies with serialmail? qmail will deliver directly by default AFAIK. -- It's actually "^-- \n", not " ^-- \n". -- Robin S. Socha Now optimized for Microsoft Internet Explorer: http://socha.net/
Re: problem with supervise
* Chris Hackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've walked through the lwq file and was pretty happy with my progress untill it came to power up the program by "/etc/rc.d/qmail start" . SysV init stinks. Have you considered running svscan from rc.local or whichever other perversion your Linux distribution uses instead? Then a repeated error message fills up that terminal like this : supervise: fatal: unable to start log/run: file does not exist And the only way to stop is to type in the command "/etc/rc.d/qmail stop" blindly, because I could not see the command I yped in as the creen is flood with the error message above. ALT-right always helps... }:- After typing that, this appears: Stopping qmail: svscan qmail logging. Say: ,[ 2.8.2. System start-up files ] |Create the /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/log/run file: | #!/bin/sh | exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t /var/log/qmail ` If anyone could give me an insight into this perticular problem I would be very appreciative. LWQ r00l3z extreme. Great, great piece of documentation. But personally, I don't like the SysV init explained there. I would recommend grabbing the excellent http://pobox.com/~tu/qmail-conf.html by Tetsu Ushijima and using that instead. -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 12:32:47AM +1100, Brett Randall wrote: "markd" == markd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: markd As you say, it relies on MUAs faithfully reproducing markd References. Fortunately for us .qmail types, mess822 provides markd reliable access to header fields for those who want to markd implement that idea. I might even look into implementing this...but first, what is mess822? cr.yp.to/mess822.htmlll markd Spammers tend not to use the Subject line either, so a little markd pattern matching would catch that. Though why spammers tend Hehe good point, except subject matching is a hard one... You'd have to watch all outgoing mail and capture all subjects that you send. I think References is more failsafe, except crappy clients like Outlook Correct. Thus the allusion to pattern matching and I'd only use it as an additionaltest to Rreference in the event of Reference munging MUAs. BIND server (which is what I have, markd Well heck pardner, round this neck of the woods some people markd might see them as fightin' words! If you'd said use djbdns, markd then, well, yes, we'd understand : Hehe I haven't ever used djbdns so the idea didn't occur to me. Apologies DJB fans! Ok. Your horse lives - this time. Regards.
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
"markd" == markd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Here's a crazy idea: And it puts the pressure on crap MUA's, too :)
Use the user-random@domain format, but have the e-mail piped
through a command that checks the References in the e-mail, and if
it contains a valid reference to an e-mail that was posted from
your own mail relay, then it passes it, otherwise, it bounces it
(or trashes it). How does that sound? Have I missed anything?
markd That's not a bad idea. Allbut the original harvester will not
markd have that information - assuming most lists are sold/shared
markd sans original content.
My Perl is a bit rusty and I'm not game to try this just yet, but how
does the following look for a .qmail-random file that rejects e-mail
directed to it if my message ID isn't in the References header? I
don't know awk, but this might be neater if someone can rewrite it in
that... BTW If you are worried about losing personal e-mail sent to
your random address, then just have one e-mail account for all your
mailing lists that uses this .qmail-random format (btw, if you are
lost about what I mean about random, read my previous posts in this
thread), and another e-mail address that you use for all other
non-list e-mail.
| perl -we "$valid = 0; while () { if ( /^References\:.*schultz\S+@ipsware\.com/ )
|{ $valid = 1; last; } } exit 99 if ($valid == 0); exit 0;"
./Maildir/
Do these exit functions pass the value back to qmail-local? Comments,
ideas and flames are most welcome.
--
"Reach out and grep someone."
- Bell Labs Unix
Re: qmail-queue patch
"Robin" == Robin S Socha [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Robin u nd t rd th fckng mn pg fr ptch nd ptch th qml srcs, rcmpl, Robin stp qml nd rnstll. And IYAM, this shorthand thingy is kind hrd Robin t rd. "f u cn rd ths, u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgrmmng." - Anonymous, 19alongtimeago Sorry, couldn't resist that quote. -- "BUG, n.: An undesirable, poorly-understood undocumented feature." - The Devil's Dictionary to Computer Studies
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
through a command that checks the References in the e-mail, and if markd That's not a bad idea. Allbut the original harvester will not markd have that information - assuming most lists are sold/shared markd sans original content. My Perl is a bit rusty and I'm not game to try this just yet, but how I was more thinking of storing the generate Messsage-IDs in a database so the test is a simple lookup. Regards.
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 28 October 2000 at 07:48:59 -0700 through a command that checks the References in the e-mail, and if markd That's not a bad idea. Allbut the original harvester will not markd have that information - assuming most lists are sold/shared markd sans original content. My Perl is a bit rusty and I'm not game to try this just yet, but how I was more thinking of storing the generate Messsage-IDs in a database so the test is a simple lookup. That's more elegant in some ways, but actually I think the simply regexp match is a better design. It means I don't have to keep my Message ID database up-to-date, for example. It *is* more easily spoofed, but I doubt enough people will use this technique to even appear on the radar of the spammers. -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
RE: fixcrio
Jay / Alexander, No!! Don't use fixcr (ucspi-tcp-0.84 and others), because fixcrio (ucspi-tcp-0.88 and others), its replacement, is *much* nicer: fixcr needs a shell call (as per Alexander's post), whereas fixcrio uses an exec call, much like the qmail-popup/checkpassword/qmail-pop3d sequence for POP3 that you may be using for POP3. Going back to Jay's command line, change, tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/fixcrio | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 to tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/fixcrio /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 (all that's changed is that the pipe symbol has been removed). I'm assuming that the above is all one line, by the way, or if not, that continuation characters are added at the end of lines. cheers, Andrew. -- From: Alexander Jernejcic[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 28 October 2000 12:31 To: Qmail Subject:RE: fixcrio hi, i am using a little shell-wrapper: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtp.sh: #!/bin/bash /usr/local/bin/fixcr | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd and call it with tcpserver instead of qmail-smtpd. just one way of doing it... ;) a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: Austad, Jay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 4:10 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: fixcrio I'm calling tcpserver with this line: tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 I need to use fixcrio to fix stupid emailers that put stray lf's in their messages. How do I integrate fixcrio into this? Do I just do: tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/fixcrio | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 Jay
traffic control and qmail-pop3d
hi, it may have been asked before, but is it possible to make qmail-pop3d log some information, especially user and bytes transfered??? and if not: is there a pop-server which can do this and which works with vmailmgr?? please help, it's very important and i'm searching for such a long time now... bye, leif
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 09:37:08PM +0900, James T. Perry wrote: Alexander Jernejcic wrote: hi, only for my interest: was this from Money Maker [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? i received that today. ;) a YUP! Ditto. PGP signature
Spam elimination solution based on References header
OK, after about 3 hours of mucking about when I should have been
studying, I've come up with a way of keeping your e-mail address to
yourself on usenet, mailing lists, etc. This means that people that
reply to your e-mail will be able to get you, because their MUA will
quote your Message ID (unless its Outlook, but I don't particularly
care if it is, myself... not from mailing lists anyhow) in the
References header.
Requirements:
-
- Two e-mail accounts on a qmail box (normal one and new one)
- I do the filtering with Gnus, but you can use whatever the hell you
like.
- Perl (I use v5, should work with v4 as well tho)
Instructions:
-
- Create a new account that will receive mail from usenet and lists (I
ingeniously called mine usenet cos Mr Socha has been using that name
in his mails and it makes sense)
- Create a .qmail file in ~usenet:
| bouncesaying "Go away. Spam not accepted here."
- Create a .qmail-default file in ~usenet:
| perl -we "\$valid = 0; while () { if ( /^References\:.*schultz\S+\@ipsware\.com/
|) { \$valid = 1; last; } } exit 99 if (\$valid == 0); exit 0;" || bouncesaying "Go
|away. Spam not accepted here."
| forward "me-$LOCAL"
(Of course, replacing 'me' with your real username, and replacing
schultz\S+\@ipsware\.com with the regex for your own message ID (look
it up in one of your posts, or defun message-make-message-id in Gnus).
- Create a .qmail-default file in ~me (whoever you really are):
./Maildir/
- Create account settings in your MUA however you do that
(gnus-posting-styles for me) so that each newsgroup/list has a
return address of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Create filtering settings so that mail addressed to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gets moved to whatever folders you want
it in
What it does:
-
When someone from a usenet group/mailing list replies to your e-mail,
the address they reply to is [EMAIL PROTECTED] The
.qmail-default file in ~usenet takes the e-mail, checks for a
reference to an e-mail which you wrote (via the Message-ID), and if it
appears to have existed, it will forward the message locally to your
real account. I have used the format "me-$LOCAL" so you can do other
stuff with it if you like (like make a ~me/.qmail-ezmlm to deliver to
some other address...I dunno why, but hey its flexible).
If an address harvester has sliced your address to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
then it will be bounced. Even if they try sending an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], it will bounce since they more than likely
won't be referencing an ID of an e-mail you have posted (no
guarantees, they could get smart, but we'll always be smarter :)
What NOT to do:
---
Do NOT subscribe to ANY lists with the e-mail address
usenet*@domain.com. If you do, you will become unpopular VERY fast I
can promise you. Subscribe with your real address, but just set your
mailing address from then on to your new usenet one.
BTW, it is now 4.50am. I am likely to have made a mistake somewhere
above. Please let me know if I have since I don't want to destroy
anyone's e-mail systems!
Ciao
Brett.
--
C:\DOS C:\DOS\RUN RUN\DOS\RUN
C:\WINDOWS C:\WINDOWS\GO C:\PC\CRAWL
OT: SPAM touble.
Hi All! This is a little off-topic, but I need to get the point-of-view from postmasters for a problem that I am having. I have a customer who has around 20 different email addresses in my server that I forward to an account at his ISP. The problem is that the postmaster at his ISP decided that my customer was spamming because he was using many different address in his outgoing messages (that use his SMTP server), so he shutdown my customers account there and black listed my server. I know for a fact that my customer was not sending spam, so, I tried contacting the postmaster at his ISP, but got the cold shoulder. My customer tried with similar success. Will I start to see other postmasters doing the same thing for my other customers? or this just an isolated case? Comments would be greately appreciated. Thanks, JES
RE: fixcrio
hi, seems as i have to update - but changing a running system ;) == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: Andrew Richards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 5:34 PM To: Qmail; 'Alexander Jernejcic'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: fixcrio Jay / Alexander, No!! Don't use fixcr (ucspi-tcp-0.84 and others), because fixcrio (ucspi-tcp-0.88 and others), its replacement, is *much* nicer: fixcr needs a shell call (as per Alexander's post), whereas fixcrio uses an exec call, much like the qmail-popup/checkpassword/qmail-pop3d sequence for POP3 that you may be using for POP3. Going back to Jay's command line, change, tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/fixcrio | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 to tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/fixcrio /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 (all that's changed is that the pipe symbol has been removed). I'm assuming that the above is all one line, by the way, or if not, that continuation characters are added at the end of lines. cheers, Andrew. -- From: Alexander Jernejcic[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 28 October 2000 12:31 To: Qmail Subject: RE: fixcrio hi, i am using a little shell-wrapper: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtp.sh: #!/bin/bash /usr/local/bin/fixcr | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd and call it with tcpserver instead of qmail-smtpd. just one way of doing it... ;) a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: Austad, Jay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 4:10 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: fixcrio I'm calling tcpserver with this line: tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 I need to use fixcrio to fix stupid emailers that put stray lf's in their messages. How do I integrate fixcrio into this? Do I just do: tcpserver -q -c 500 -x /etc/smtp.cdb -H -l mail.marketwatchmail.com -R -u 503 -g 503 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/fixcrio | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 Jay
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
"Robin S. Socha" wrote: Martin is there any chance that the list's admin would consider Martin removing the header info that shows the adress of the sender Martin before sending it on to the list? That's a *very* stupid idea. Sorry for pointing this out to your ego, but that is your opinion Robin, not mine. I'd love never to receive answers anywhere than on the list and never to my private addresses. I use several different reply adresses depending on where i am located at the time i write the mail (home, work, etc.) and thus i don't get the answers the place i want it all the time, which is in my dedicated qmail list mail folder where mails sent to the list ends up. It is not really an option to change the way my MUA is configured everytime i send a mail depeding on where my mail is heading, so for me it would be ideal if the list would auto-remove my From/Mail-from/Reply-to. I don't see why this is stupid, since you NEVER would be in need of my personal address unless i gave it to you. /Martin
=local entries in qmail-users
Are there any circumstances where qmail-lspawn will find a match in qmail-users for a local address that didn't have anything prepended to it? Consider the scenario: virtualdomains contains mydomain.com:joe.schmoe and the assign file contains =joe.shmoe:joe:503:78:/home/joe::: Qmail-send translates the local part of [EMAIL PROTECTED] to joe.schmoe-joe.schmoe. Why then does qmail-pw2u create entries that contain =user: when there's no way matches can be made against those entries? I hope I'm making sense. regards, James
Re: traffic control and qmail-pop3d
| it may have been asked before, but is it possible to make qmail-pop3d log | some information, especially user and bytes transfered??? no, without changing sources as far as I know | and if not: is there a pop-server which can do this and which works with | vmailmgr?? I don't know about any other Maildir-aware pop3 daemon | please help, it's very important and i'm searching for such a long time now... Isn't it better to fire up your editor and look for sources ? regards -- Mira Tempr [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---[..ekit...]--- http://www.cekit.cz/ it's all about Internet
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Nice to see that people are able to be constructive around here *pats Felix on his little head* Felix von Leitner wrote: Thus spake Martin Jespersen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Martin is there any chance that the list's admin would consider Martin removing the header info that shows the adress of the sender Martin before sending it on to the list? That's a *very* stupid idea. Sorry for pointing this out to your ego, but that is your opinion Robin, not mine. I'd love never to receive answers anywhere than on the list and never to my private addresses. Martin, the one with the overinflated ego is you. If you don't want people to know your email address, then DON'T USE IT. I use several different reply adresses depending on where i am located at the time i write the mail (home, work, etc.) and thus i don't get the answers the place i want it all the time, which is in my dedicated qmail list mail folder where mails sent to the list ends up. What kind of egomanic loser are you, anyway? Who cares about the reasons for your incompetence? You _are_ too incompetent to post from only one address, and that is _your_ problem. Not mine, not Dan's, not Robins. It is not really an option to change the way my MUA is configured everytime i send a mail depeding on where my mail is heading, so for me it would be ideal if the list would auto-remove my From/Mail-from/Reply-to. Oh, it is not an option. Right. If you can't be bothered to read the fucking manual and get a grip of your email setup, how in the seven hells can you expect _others_ to work around your fscking incompetence? Your impertinence is breathtaking! I don't see why this is stupid, since you NEVER would be in need of my personal address unless i gave it to you. Fuck off and die, pathetic whiner. But before that: please fix your mail software to not use lines 72 chars. Felix
Re: Spam elimination solution based on References header
OK, It would appear as if I've just found the first (and lets hope
last) error in my spam elimination technique/code. In
~usenet/.qmail-default, the references regex will only work if the
message ID is on the same line as the References: string. I've
modified the regex (and code) to allow the Message ID to be on any
line following the regex before the next colon (:) appears indicating
that the next field is now starting.
The new ~usenet/.qmail-default is:
| perl -we "\$valid = 0; while () { if ( /^References\:/ ) { while () { if ( /\:/
|) {\$valid = 2; last; } if ( /schultz\S+\@ipsware\.com/ ) { \$valid = 1; last; } }
|last if \$valid == 1; if (\$valid == 2) { \$valid = 0; last; } } } exit 99 if
|(\$valid == 0); exit 0; " || bouncesaying "You're either using a crap MUA or you're
|spamming me. Go away."
| forward "brett-$LOCAL"
It looks messy, but it isn't really. If you want to figure out how it
works, just put a new line after each ; and { }. Indents help as well.
Any opinions on this method of spam elimination, please let me know!
Brett.
--
"I wonder what Jesus would do if HE had to reload Windows 95 for the
eighth time today ?"
- Mirabour Gilbride
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Thus spake Martin Jespersen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Nice to see that people are able to be constructive around here *pats Felix on his little head* While we are talking about "constructive", please construct yourself a gut and shoot yourself, idiot. Felix
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
markd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Indeed this is an excellent strategy - if done properly. The problem is, a lot of people don't have the ability to capture all addresses in a domain - and of course user-random@domain is trivially defeated by a competent slicer and dicer if user@domain is valid. There's a simple solution to that. Use user@domain as another spam trap and have your *real* address that you give out to people who you want to have a stable address be user-something@domain and be careful about revealing that something. :) -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
Re: Spam elimination solution based on References header
OK, It would appear as if I've just found the first (and lets hope last) error in my spam elimination technique/code. In ~usenet/.qmail-default, the references regex will only work if the message ID is on the same line as the References: string. I've modified the regex (and code) to allow the Message ID to be on any line following the regex before the next colon (:) appears indicating that the next field is now starting. Why are you posting this? Spam traps like this rely on you keeping it to yourself. If enough people start using this, spammers will adjust like they now post from domains that exist and put "Re:" in the subject. Felix
RE: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Why are you such an asshole? Who's the owner of this list? I'm getting sick of hearing Felix's shit. -Original Message- From: Felix von Leitner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 6:56 PM To: Qmail mailing list Subject: Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list... Thus spake Martin Jespersen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Nice to see that people are able to be constructive around here *pats Felix on his little head* While we are talking about "constructive", please construct yourself a gut and shoot yourself, idiot. Felix
OT : Mail Clients, What Do You Use???
Okay, this may be a stupid question, please no flames... I am just looking for a little wisdom when choosing one, thanks!!! Jesse
Re: OT : Mail Clients, What Do You Use???
"jsunday" == jsunday [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Okay, this may be a stupid question, please no flames... I am just looking for a little wisdom when choosing one, thanks!!! This was covered on the list only a month or two back. Try a search: http://www-archive.ornl.gov:8000/ -- "Indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to describe the history of the computer industry for the past decade as a massive effort to keep up with Apple." - Byte, December 1994
Re: Spam elimination solution based on References header
Felix von Leitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Spam traps like this rely on you keeping it to yourself. If enough people start using this, spammers will adjust like they now post from domains that exist and put "Re:" in the subject. This spam trap, unlike most of them, require that spammers keep an additional piece of information around in addition to the e-mail address, information that they cannot construct mechanically (provided that you construct the regex carefully and different people use MTAs with different message ID construction patterns, the latter generally being the case). That's a *huge* loss for the spammers; unless tons of people start doing this (and even in that case), they just can't handle that complexity. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
Re: Spam elimination solution based on References header
"Russ" == Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This spam trap, unlike most of them, require that spammers keep an additional piece of information around in addition to the e-mail address, information that they cannot construct mechanically (provided that you construct the regex carefully and different people use MTAs with different message ID construction patterns, the latter generally being the case). That's a *huge* loss for the spammers; unless tons of people start doing this (and even in that case), they just can't handle that complexity. And, the gorgeous thing about message IDs is that even if some spammer finds a way to steal your message ID and use it in spam attempts, just change your message ID. Its a helluva lot easier than changing e-mail addresses... Oh, and BTW. The original message with bugfixes is posted at http://xbox.ipsware.com/spam.html for those interested in implementing this. So far there have been two bug fixes. They are not detailed, but the working copy is on that page. If you use Gnus, also take a look at http://xbox.ipsware.com/dot-gnus.html to see how I've set up my Gnus to handle these addresses. -- "I have travelled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processings is a fad that won't last out the year." - The editor in charge of business books for Prentice-Hall, 1957
FILTERING ATTACHEMENTS
Can someone point me to documentation or just tell me how I can filter out ALL attachements to my smtp server. I'm using Qmail solely in a listserver environment and I want to make sure that zero attachements get through. I'm new to QMail though and don't readily see how this could be done. Thanks Anthony
Re: Spam elimination solution based on References header
"Brett" == Brett Randall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: snipped I didn't want to, but I had to... I've updated the spam eliminator perl code AGAIN to handle crap MUAs that only support In-Reply-To and don't use the References line. Its up to you whether you use the In-Reply-To or not. I might dump it yet. I'll see how it handles... http://xbox.ipsware.com/spam.html -- "Give no sleep to your eyes, Nor slumber to your eyelids." - Proverbs 6:4, NKJV
Re: SPAM - Help!
Big Brother tells me that [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: there is a 'badrcptto'-patch on www.qmail.org this will solve the problem on aris server. but... then he will bomb postmasteraccounts on other servers. not the best solution for the net. only cuting of the open relay and hang the admin of this server will solve this situation. Yes, but the only mail servers that will get postmaster bombed are ones that either condone spam by allowing users to send it out, or are open relays. If RBL and ORBS isn't enough to get these people to stop allowing relaying, perhaps postmaster mail filling up would... -- "Restore your inalienable human rights. Jack McKinney Vote Libertarian. http://www.lp.org http://www.lorentz.com http://www.harrybrowne2000.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/D68F2C07 4096g/38AEF076 PGP signature
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Big Brother tells me that Brett Randall wrote: "Martin" == Martin Jespersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A better alternative, IMHO, is to use a certain anti-spam e-mail address (someone on this list uses it but I can't remember who) that That would be I. For mailing lists, it is even better: 1. [EMAIL PROTECTED] bounces emails sent to it with a message indicating that the address has expired. The return address of this message has an encrypted timestamp, such as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. Encrypted addresses such as above have their timestamp verified as recent. Old messages are bounced exactly as in #1. These two steps prevent 'cold call' emails. Your email to me must be a response to an email from me. Very soon, I will have this patched so that emails with a valid signature from a key on my ring are always accepted. Also, I allow certain addresses in under certain criteria. For mailing lists, I do the following: 3. I subscribe to each list as a different address, such as the one for this list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4. Email coming to [EMAIL PROTECTED] has its headers checked to see if it was processed by the appropriate list server. 5a. Mail passing #4 is put into my qmail folder (I have over 200 hundred folders). I have a shell script for reading each of these folders (or specifed ones), which set MAILUSER and MAILHOST. 5b. Mail not passing #4 is redirected to [EMAIL PROTECTED]; see step #1. So far, I have not seen any spam to my qmail address 8-). -- "Restore your inalienable human rights. Jack McKinney Vote Libertarian. http://www.lp.org http://www.lorentz.com http://www.harrybrowne2000.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/D68F2C07 4096g/38AEF076 PGP signature
Listar
Does anyone know of any specail settings/configs that need to be in place to use QMail with Listar? Qmail is running on my listserver and has been tested repeatedly today. It sends/receives mail without problem, but it will not pass off mail to Listar for some reason. I'm getting Permission Denied errors in my mail logs and mail is backing up in my que. A freind of mine who is fairly familiar with QMail is looking at it now, but doesn;t see anything wrong. Was just wondering if anyone here might know something we've overlooked? Thanks Anthony
Re: Listar
"Anthony" == Anthony Abby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does anyone know of any specail settings/configs that need to be in place to use QMail with Listar? Qmail is running on my listserver and has been tested repeatedly today. It sends/receives mail without problem, but it will not pass off mail to Listar for some reason. I'm getting Permission Denied errors in my mail logs and mail is backing up in my que. A freind of mine who is fairly familiar with QMail is looking at it now, but doesn;t see anything wrong. Was just wondering if anyone here might know something we've overlooked? Permission Denied is a file system error. I presume deliveries to Listar are handled by a pipe (|) in a .qmail file? What are the permissions on that file, and who owns it? I don't know listar, but in qmail all .qmail* files must be owned by the system user that is receiving the mail for the account. If it is owned by root, then you're stuffed. BTW I would highly recommend ezmlm instead of Listar, but hey its your list-serv... -- Customer: "I'm running Windows '98" Tech: "Yes." Customer: "My computer isn't working now." Tech: "Yes, you said that."
Re: Listar
"Brett" == Brett Randall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: snip BTW: Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12573 invoked for bounce); 29 Oct 2000 04:59:48 - Date: 29 Oct 2000 04:59:48 - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: failure notice Hi. This is the qmail-send program at ipsware.com. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 209.96.181.192 does not like recipient. Remote host said: 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) Giving up on 209.96.181.192. -- "I don't have anything against geeks. I was one for 11 years! I used to think PC's were the greatest thing since sliced bread... Then someone showed me sliced bread."
Re: SPAM - Help!
Jack McKinney wrote: SNIP Yes, but the only mail servers that will get postmaster bombed are ones that either condone spam by allowing users to send it out, or are open relays. If RBL and ORBS isn't enough to get these people to stop allowing relaying, perhaps postmaster mail filling up would... SNIP Ummm, perhaps I misunderstand something completely here. Please correct me if I'm wrong here. Here's how I see it working: I am a spammer. I own spamming.pissant.luser.domain. I send mail from spamming.pissant.luser.domain, but I forge envelopes and From: to say that I'm (for example) ibm.com, to beat pattern-matching spam checks, and maybe fool some users that that's really where I'm from. Don't bounces go to ibm.com? How are we, (in the example), as ibm.com, to prevent these bounces from coming to us? Not to mention all the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], complaining about the spam... Am I missing something? GW
Re: SPAM - Help!
Big Brother tells me that Greg White wrote: Jack McKinney wrote: SNIP Yes, but the only mail servers that will get postmaster bombed are ones that either condone spam by allowing users to send it out, or are open relays. If RBL and ORBS isn't enough to get these people to stop allowing relaying, perhaps postmaster mail filling up would... SNIP Ummm, perhaps I misunderstand something completely here. Please correct me if I'm wrong here. Here's how I see it working: I am a spammer. I own spamming.pissant.luser.domain. I send mail from spamming.pissant.luser.domain, but I forge envelopes and From: to say that I'm (for example) ibm.com, to beat pattern-matching spam checks, and maybe fool some users that that's really where I'm from. Don't bounces go to ibm.com? How are we, (in the example), as ibm.com, to prevent these bounces from coming to us? Not to mention all the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], complaining about the spam... Am I missing something? Maybe. If the email is rejected AFTER being accepted by your mail server, then your mail server will bounce it based on the headers. If it is rejected at the SMTP port of your server (as is typical of the relay checking methods such as RBL and ORBS), then the sending mail server will generate the bounce. This won't triple bounce at IBM, it will triple bounce to _itself_. For example, I want to spam using [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the return address. I find an open relay at mail.irelay.com, so I connect to it and drop off a few hundred thousand copies of my message with my fake from address. You are on my spam list, and your server is rejecting mail via ORBS, which has contacted irelay.com to complain already, and irelay.com is unwilling or ignorant. My message does this: 1. My machine to mail.irelay.com over smtp. accepted. 2. mail.irelay.com contacts your mail server and tries to deliver the message. Your SMTP port rejects it because it comes from an open relay. 3. mail.irelay.com bounces the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If this address does not exist, then microsoft.com bounces the message back to mail.irelay.com. 4. This message is a triple bounce when it arrives at mail.irelay.com, though technically it is a bounce of a valid mailer-daemon mesasge. In any event, it ends up at [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- "Restore your inalienable human rights. Jack McKinney Vote Libertarian. http://www.lp.org http://www.lorentz.com http://www.harrybrowne2000.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/D68F2C07 4096g/38AEF076 PGP signature
Re: SPAM - Help!
Jack McKinney wrote: Big Brother tells me that Greg White wrote: Jack McKinney wrote: SNIP Yes, but the only mail servers that will get postmaster bombed are ones that either condone spam by allowing users to send it out, or are open relays. If RBL and ORBS isn't enough to get these people to stop allowing relaying, perhaps postmaster mail filling up would... SNIP Ummm, perhaps I misunderstand something completely here. Please correct me if I'm wrong here. Here's how I see it working: I am a spammer. I own spamming.pissant.luser.domain. I send mail from spamming.pissant.luser.domain, but I forge envelopes and From: to say that I'm (for example) ibm.com, to beat pattern-matching spam checks, and maybe fool some users that that's really where I'm from. Don't bounces go to ibm.com? How are we, (in the example), as ibm.com, to prevent these bounces from coming to us? Not to mention all the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], complaining about the spam... Am I missing something? Maybe. If the email is rejected AFTER being accepted by your mail server, then your mail server will bounce it based on the headers. If it is rejected at the SMTP port of your server (as is typical of the relay checking methods such as RBL and ORBS), then the sending mail server will generate the bounce. This won't triple bounce at IBM, it will triple bounce to _itself_. For example, I want to spam using [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the return address. I find an open relay at mail.irelay.com, so I connect to it and drop off a few hundred thousand copies of my message with my fake from address. You are on my spam list, and your server is rejecting mail via ORBS, which has contacted irelay.com to complain already, and irelay.com is unwilling or ignorant. My message does this: 1. My machine to mail.irelay.com over smtp. accepted. 2. mail.irelay.com contacts your mail server and tries to deliver the message. Your SMTP port rejects it because it comes from an open relay. 3. mail.irelay.com bounces the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If this address does not exist, then microsoft.com bounces the message back to mail.irelay.com. 4. This message is a triple bounce when it arrives at mail.irelay.com, though technically it is a bounce of a valid mailer-daemon mesasge. In any event, it ends up at [EMAIL PROTECTED] SNIP That's what I thought. So, if either of the following two items is true, postmaster will still get the bounces: 1. The relay is not yet listed in an anti-relay domain. 2. The receiving SMTP host is not using strong anti-spam techniques at all, such as rss,rbl,dul,orbs, etc. Not helpful in all cases, given the ease of access to a new dialup account, and sending the forged header messages out through your ISPs smarthost... GW
Re: SPAM - Help!
Jack McKinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Big Brother tells me that Greg White wrote: I am a spammer. I own spamming.pissant.luser.domain. I send mail from spamming.pissant.luser.domain, but I forge envelopes and From: to say that I'm (for example) ibm.com, to beat pattern-matching spam checks, and maybe fool some users that that's really where I'm from. Don't bounces go to ibm.com? How are we, (in the example), as ibm.com, to prevent these bounces from coming to us? Not to mention all the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], complaining about the spam... Am I missing something? Maybe. If the email is rejected AFTER being accepted by your mail server, then your mail server will bounce it based on the headers. It has absolutely nothing to do with what the victim's mail server does (in this case, ibm.com). It has to do with what the mail servers of the people receiving the spam do. ibm.com has *absolutely no control* over whether or not they receive bounces; there's nothing they can change about their e-mail configuration to avoid them. They'll get bounces from all the sites that accept mail first and then generate bounces. Such as, say, qmail by default, or the entirety of AOL. For example, I want to spam using [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the return address. I find an open relay at mail.irelay.com, so I connect to it and drop off a few hundred thousand copies of my message with my fake from address. You are on my spam list, and your server is rejecting mail via ORBS, which has contacted irelay.com to complain already, and irelay.com is unwilling or ignorant. My message does this: 1. My machine to mail.irelay.com over smtp. accepted. 2. mail.irelay.com contacts your mail server and tries to deliver the message. Your SMTP port rejects it because it comes from an open relay. 3. mail.irelay.com bounces the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If this address does not exist, then microsoft.com bounces the message back to mail.irelay.com. Yup. So if you're running microsoft.com's mail servers, you're screwed. You just have to swallow the bounces and hope that someone will close the damn relay and stop the spammer. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
