Re: Who is List Manager
Thus said Niles on Mon, 14 May 2001 11:49:46 EDT: Jim, Try sending mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I believe you mean [EMAIL PROTECTED] My guess, however, is that he isn't on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 8:02pm up 5 days, 22:39, 5 users, load average: 1.22, 1.17, 1.13
Re: OT - Problems with daemontools 0.70
Thus said Michael Geier on Mon, 14 May 2001 13:39:10 CDT: 'preciate that no one flamed... Generally you won't get flamed for decent technical questions like this, however you might get flamed for using Microsoft Outlook to post your email. :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 8:06pm up 5 days, 22:43, 5 users, load average: 1.24, 1.40, 1.25
Re: Handling high volume lists
Thus said Robin S. Socha on 14 May 2001 22:30:00 +0200: Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see a Mail-Followup-To header in your message. Are people supposed to guess whether or not you are on the list or whether or not you want a cc header listing your address so that your mail filter can handle the message differently. Everyone here is on this list unless otherwise stated. Noone therefore wants Cc:s unless otherwise stated. How long have you been in a technical environment? I disagree completely. There are many cases in which I have greatly appreciated a Cc on mailing lists on which I participate because they generally arrive much sooner than the mailing list answer does. This list especially has been known to have delays of up to at least 3 hours before emails that are sent actually show up in my mailbox. That doesn't help much when the critical problem has escalated and my hair has fallen out. It wouldn't be hard to configure your Gnus to add the mail-followup-to header for this list. Even though it isn't quite a standard and probably never will be, I know a lot of users on this list have software that respects it. I know mine does. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 8:14pm up 5 days, 22:51, 5 users, load average: 1.11, 1.18, 1.20
Re: html based email
On Wed, 09 May 2001 09:40:22 PDT, Michael Boyiazis wrote: It has 3 parts: plain text html for normals html for aol Shouldn't that be: text/plain for normals bloat/html for lusers bloat/html for aol users :-) Andy
Re: assign file being overwritten regularly
On Tue, 08 May 2001 18:42:20 EDT, Carl J. Danowski wrote: Does anyone know why the 'assign' file in /etc/qmail/users would continually be overwritten? Hmm, who else has ``root'' access to your box? If none, which cronjob did you write that overwrites it? If none, which web utility did you write/install which overwrites it? Basically, there is no qmail process that will do this---you or someone must be doing it. Andy
Re: Qmail and its parts.
On Mon, 07 May 2001 14:36:54 EDT, Carl J. Danowski wrote: Why is someone sending this message again? I was successfully helped. Someone else finally noticed... If you check the archives, I brought this up months ago and no one seemed to notice the duplicates. mail.delanet.com has been doing this for quite some time now. I finally just wrote a procmail recipe for all of mail.delanet.com on another account that I post from because I was tired of seeing the duplicates. :-) Andy
Re: defaultdomain ?
Thus said Joan Picanyol i Puig on Sat, 05 May 2001 22:04:49 +0200: However, look at the From: header of this message :( This is most likely a client problem. You need to configure your client to use the correct address. BTW, you didn't show the contents of the rest of the control files... At any rate, the Message-id of your email looks like this: Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, either you have misconfigured qmail or your outgoing mail server is not your qmail server... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 2:16pm up 28 days, 17:32, 5 users, load average: 1.08, 1.07, 1.01
Re: It's not my list but ... (AV Bots)
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:35:10 CDT, Bruno Wolff III wrote: It isn't my list, but if it was I would add the IP addresses of any servers that sent a virus warning to my list into my tcp rules block list. Unfortunately that won't work. The email is sent to a list exploder and never directly delivered to your mail server. So, this would only be useful on the list server. :-) Andy
Re: Ban These Exchange Server Users
On 24 Apr 2001 06:57:45 PDT, Russ Allbery wrote: I know you all are so against it... but don't you think it's time to re-consider installing a scanner on Mailing Lists? No, I think it's time to kick everyone running one of those broken scanners that mails the mailing list off of the mailing list. Maybe it's time subscriber-only posting was enabled. :-) All of this would have been prevented in this case because non of the AV addresses are subscribers. Andy
Re: tcpserver help
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 17:01:57 +0200, NDSoftware wrote: PLEASE USE A ANTIVIRUS !!! Please don't send lame messages like this to the list. If you have already blocked the virus with your software then what are you worried about?
Re: VIRUS ALERT
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 11:15:08 -0300, Alan R. wrote: You are sending email with virus. Please use some anti-virus program. What makes it worse are dumb anti-virus scanners that bounce messages back to the list... :-) Andy
Re: [OT] Re: VIRUS ALERT
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:10:10 EDT, Jason Kawaja wrote: folks on the list who are _still_ using a windows box should go to : Maybe you should refer them to something like: http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Installation-HOWTO/index.html or http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq4.html ;-) Andy
Re: Can't establish SMTP connection (Error 4.4.1)
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:22:50 +0200, Willy De la Court wrote: Is'nt it time to install a virus scanner on the list. Why? I see no reason why the list should have a virus scanner. Andy
Here we go again [was Re: Antigen found W32/Navidad-B (Sophos,Norman) virus ]
Thus said ANTIGEN_ITMAILMAN2 on Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:37:19 BST: Antigen for Exchange found Emanuel.exe infected with W32/Navidad-B (Sophos,Norman) virus. Please fix your lame borken anti-virus scanner!!! Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 9:22pm up 17 days, 37 min, 5 users, load average: 1.04, 1.20, 1.24
[OT] Re: Sticky question about qmail-queue and qmail-smtpd interactions
Thus said Jason Haar on Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:06:02 +1200: me to realise a rare error condition I hadn't expected. This virus scanner didn't like scanning a 90Mb zip'ped AVI file (ahem) - whereas another vendor scanner took 1.5minutes to scan it, this one took nearly two hours... Tell them to send MPEG instead. ;-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 8:23pm up 12 days, 23:39, 6 users, load average: 1.46, 1.50, 1.45
Re: RFCs?
Thus said "D. J. Bernstein" on 15 Apr 2001 19:31:35 -: See http://cr.yp.to/qmail/warfield.html. Wow, I've never seen a more clueless sysadmin.[1] It's apparent that he doesn't understand what the problem was and decided to make qmail the scapegoat. What's sad is that there are people out there that would believe what he has to say because he poses as an ``expert''. Andy [1] Actually I have. :-) [---[system uptime]] 10:01pm up 9 days, 1:17, 4 users, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00
Re: End of the qmail era?
Thus said Adam McKenna on Sun, 01 Apr 2001 01:48:17 -0800: http://www.sendmail.net,,,news,2001,apr,01,3,5,@00030315464031/sm10/ Come on now. You can do better than this. I got a good laugh out of it anyway. :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:00pm up 46 days, 11:03, 4 users, load average: 1.19, 1.27, 1.12
Re: very large queue list (qmail-qread)
Thus said "Ross Davis - Data Anywhere" on Sun, 25 Mar 2001 21:53:02 PST: when I run qmail-qread I get 108,000 lines of emails, most of which have sent. When I run qmail-qstat is says that there typically about 250 emails that in queue. Is that normal to have that may lines returned from qmail-qread? Yep, however, you might want to only show those that haven't been delivered yet: qmail-qread | grep -v done Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:17pm up 39 days, 23:20, 6 users, load average: 1.54, 1.73, 1.70
Re: 554 too many hops?
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 14:32:36 PST, "Brad Dameron" wrote: failed_after_I_sent_the_message./Remote_host_said:_554_too_many_hops,_mail_i s_looping. Anyone know what can cause this error? Is there a way to stop the loop? It means there are too many received lines in a message. To stop the loop, look through the headers and figure out where the loop is. Andy
Re: 2 questions
Thus said Alberto Dainotti on Sun, 11 Mar 2001 15:31:30 +0100: Is there a pop server allowing to use the maildir format for users who have "Maildir" and a standard Mailbox file for the other users ? qmail-pop3d comes with qmail, but it only supports maildir, why would you want both? The ideal thing would be that this pop server would work with ssl too. You can wrap SSL around pop using stunnel. Is there a way to convert a Mailbox to maildir format ? I believe someone wrote a script to do this already---look on qmail.org for it. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:27pm up 25 days, 12:30, 5 users, load average: 1.08, 1.27, 1.26
Re: 2 questions
Thus said David Dyer-Bennet on 12 Mar 2001 00:21:10 CST: Because my local users are used to using mailbox-based tools, but I'm using vmailmgr for virtual support and it likes maildir. And some of my local users want to also check via pop from time to time. How do you intend to keep the mailbox and maildir ``in sync?'' Now, if you can convince your users to use one or the other then you could just put the proper delivery instruction in their .qmail file. i.e. for user joe who wants mailbox format: ~joe/.qmail: ./Mailbox and for fred who wants pop (using maildir) ~fred/.qmail: ./Maildir/ Of course, now if joe wants pop then he will be out of luck unless you do something like: ~joe/.qmail: ./Mailbox ./Maildir/ Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:33pm up 25 days, 23:36, 7 users, load average: 1.08, 1.08, 1.08
Re: Error 554 from hotmail
Thus said [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 09 Mar 2001 13:55:22 +0800: I've got 800+ error 554 form hotmail out of 1000+ email sent to valid hotmail.com accounts. Can anyone explain what's the problem - Hotmail or qmail or network problem? Why don't you post a copy of one of the errors? Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:58pm up 22 days, 23:01, 7 users, load average: 1.14, 1.17, 1.11
Re: e-mail notification
On Wed, 07 Mar 2001 17:19:39 PST, "info" wrote: is there a way to notify me that i've received an e-mail for the account [EMAIL PROTECTED] into my other account [EMAIL PROTECTED] , without forwarding a copy of the e-mail? Something like: | sed -n -f $HOME/headers.sed | qmail-inject -f$SENDER [EMAIL PROTECTED]; exit 0 where headers.sed is: /^From:/p /^Subject:/p Seems to work pretty good for me. I'm sure there are cleaner ways than this because this will also match text within the body of the message. Andy
Re: e-mail notification
On Wed, 07 Mar 2001 17:19:39 PST, "info" wrote: is there a way to notify me that i've received an e-mail for the account [EMAIL PROTECTED] into my other account [EMAIL PROTECTED] , without forwarding a copy of the e-mail? Oops, forgot one thing... Don't forget to put the normal delivery instruction for that user after that command. i.e. ./Maildir/ Andy
Re: Qmail and time zone
On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 17:08:43 EST, wrote: This is very annoying! I've spent lots of time training the users to configure their clients properly, and now my qmail server sends out garbage, which defeats the purpose. :( What did you train your users to do? They should be putting in a correct Date header with the right timezone information---if they aren't retrain them. Most users won't ever look at the rest of the headers such as Received and it is more appropriate that they are in UTC/GMT. Andy
Re: mailserver buffering
Thus said "Chrisanthy Carlane" on Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:13:52 +0700: What I want to ask is: HOW to create that buffering thing ? Do I have to add every user for every domain(which will be a lot of user)? With a standard qmail install it's as simple as: Add their domain to /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts They must produce an appropriate MX record in their DNS information which points to your mail server. I don't know what addition complexities vpopmail might add, but I suspect this should still work. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:17pm up 12 days, 23:19, 6 users, load average: 1.01, 1.11, 1.21
Duplicate mails on mailing list.
It seems that someone's mail server re-injecting messages to this mailing list. I just got another copy of a message that I sent yesterday. Has anyone else noticed this? The headers are included and what I have seen is that the Message-id has changed maybe to the mail server that is re-injecting the message and obviously the Return-path and all the Received lines. This is the original: Received: (qmail 6694 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2001 06:22:51 - Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 Feb 2001 06:22:51 - Received: from localhost by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.2.0) for andyb@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:22:51 -0700 (MST) Received: (qmail 28594 invoked by uid 0); 27 Feb 2001 06:22:25 - Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED] by mail.calderasystems.com with scan4virus-0.50 (uvscan: v4.0.70/v4077. . Clean. Processed in 0.609433 secs); 26/02/2001 23:22:25 Received: from id.wustl.edu (128.252.140.87) by mail.calderasystems.com with SMTP; 27 Feb 2001 06:22:24 - Received: (qmail 32017 invoked by alias); 27 Feb 2001 06:22:23 - Precedence: bulk List-unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-post: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 32014 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2001 06:22:23 - Mailing-list: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-image-url: http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/pictures/mugshot1sm.jpg X-url: http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ In-reply-to: Message from "Chrisanthy Carlane" [EMAIL PROTECTED] of "Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:13:52 +0700." 000c01c0a084$7531d060$8924a5ca@everyone Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-to: andyb@localhost Delivered-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-to: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-to: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: "Chrisanthy Carlane" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: mailserver buffering Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:17:22 -0700 From: Andy Bradford [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the duplicate: Received: (qmail 15724 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2001 17:53:13 - Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Feb 2001 17:53:13 - Received: from localhost by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.2.0) for andyb@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:53:13 -0700 (MST) Received: (qmail 22216 invoked by uid 0); 28 Feb 2001 17:53:00 - Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED] by mail.calderasystems.com with scan4virus-0.50 (uvscan: v4.0.70/v4077. . Clean. Processed in 3.906777 secs); 28/02/2001 10:52:56 Received: from id.wustl.edu (128.252.140.87) by mail.calderasystems.com with SMTP; 28 Feb 2001 17:52:56 - Received: (qmail 5699 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2001 17:52:54 - Precedence: bulk List-unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-post: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 5696 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2001 17:52:53 - Mailing-list: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-image-url: http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/pictures/mugshot1sm.jpg X-url: http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ In-reply-to: Message from "Chrisanthy Carlane" [EMAIL PROTECTED] of "Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:13:52 +0700." 000c01c0a084$7531d060$8924a5ca@everyone Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-to: andyb@localhost Delivered-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-to: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-to: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Chrisanthy Carlane" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: mailserver buffering Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:17:22 -0700 From: Andy Bradford [EMAIL PROTECTED] Andy
Re: qmail vulnerability
Thus said "D. J. Bernstein" on 01 Mar 2001 02:27:37 GMT: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/2237 ``Currently the SecurityFocus staff are not aware of any vendor supplied patches for this issue.'' Why haven't they updated this? On a properly configured qmail system this is a non-issue. Why is that not the *fix* that they seek? http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/6969 Isn't this a repeat of the first? The *exploit* code even looks similar (if not the same). http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/6970 Again the same issue which is easily solved by configuring qmail properly. http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-1999-0144 More of the same. Maybe they should define what they consider the OS... Out of curiosity, is this why softlimit was added to the daemontools package? http://www.insecure.org/sploits/qmail.DOS.rcpt.html Again the same problem... http://xforce.iss.net/static/208.php At least they got the version right here, but still the same problem which is easily taken care of with proper configuration. http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2000-01/1170.html At least this one is not as dull as the rest. :-) If you have seen any of these web pages, or any similar web pages at other locations, please send me email with the following information: I haven't seen any additional pages, but the first three listed I had seen before. When I first saw the reports I decided to test my current systems against what was proposed. Each test failed to reproduce the attack described. I was actually surprised because I wasn't certain how the systems had been setup (I didn't do the initial configuration of the systems). Of course it didn't have any effect (other than closing the connection with a temporary error) on the system. I suppose an attacker could attempt to exhaust the memory by taking up all the connections available, however, even this is avoidable by doing the math. For example, tcpserver by default will only accept 40 connections. If each qmail-smtpd is started with softlimit -m 200 that comes out to 80M of RAM that will ever be allocated. On a server with 128M this won't even touch swap (unless there are other services running on the server in which case the admin *will* have figured that into the total). Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:43pm up 14 days, 23:45, 7 users, load average: 1.22, 1.16, 1.17
Re: nfs mounting /var/qmail/alias
Thus said "Phil Oester" on Tue, 27 Feb 2001 20:02:15 PST: Any issues with NFS mounting the alias directory so a common version can be shared by all mail servers? You should probably use the ``fastforward'' package and then distribute the alias.cdb with rsync or something like that. I believe that would be more reliable than using NFS to mount the alias directory. In addition, it gives you a speedier lookup of aliases... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 9:33pm up 13 days, 21:35, 8 users, load average: 1.02, 1.08, 1.14
Re: mailserver buffering
Thus said "Chrisanthy Carlane" on Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:44:14 +0700: They must produce an appropriate MX record in their DNS information which points to your mail server. OK, and when their emails go to my server, where do they go(what directory, do I have to make a directory for their domain? and what about the users? Not necessary. They will be queued up in qmail's mail queue until they can be delivered to their mail server (or until the message has been in your queue too long and the message bounces). Simple really. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:08am up 13 days, 10 min, 6 users, load average: 1.06, 1.20, 1.23
Re: forwarding when somebody already has an account
Thus said Chris Hellberg on Wed, 01 Jan 1997 04:57:21 +1300: Oops, you're right, doesn't seem to work. The file should be named just .qmail in the user's directory. I've tried it with .qmail file and works for me so give that a shot. Just so you understand why this works and not .qmail-default... .qmail-default is only read if there is an additional part in the email address such as [EMAIL PROTECTED] and a corresponding .qmail-admin does not exist. If .qmail-admin exists it will use the delivery instructions in that file, if it doesn't exist it will follow delivery instructions in .qmail-default. If that doesn't exist either then the mail will bounce with ``Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)'' Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:15pm up 10 days, 12:17, 6 users, load average: 1.23, 1.23, 1.13
Re: Missing To:/From: Fields in Virtual Domain Setup.
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 16:57:59 PST, wrote: have I obviously missed?? I've used the LWQ and set up the qmail server using Ch 11 of Running with qmail - Using qmail as an ISP server. Am I supposed to resupply the To: / From: fields using variables in the .qmail-default file?? Any help would be greatly appreciated! No, qmail will not modify those headers by default. Exchange pullmail must be removing them or they are not included with the email when it was injected into the queue. Try looking at the mail in the Maildir to see if they are present before they get pop'd. In addition, how are the messages being put into the queue? Are you doing it from a script? Are you sending it from a MUA? And no, you shouldn't have to resupply them in a .qmail-default... :-) Andy
Re: tcpserver prints to console!?!
Thus said Paul Farber on Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:28:56 EST: /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -q -ladmin.f-tech.net -xtcp.cdb -- 0 25 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd I think you need a 21 at the end of that line (and that line should be all on one line). Also, the multilog part of the qmail-smtpd dosen't seem to fire off... no errors, but also no supervise multilog. Did you set the sticky bit on the supervised directory? For example, /var/qmail/supervise/send should have the sticky bit and then it will launch a supervise process for /var/qmail/supervise/send/log. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:36pm up 6 days, 22:38, 7 users, load average: 1.03, 1.13, 1.16
Re: redirecting Mail ??
Thus said TAG on Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:36:05 +0200: ok - Yes - how Put a single ``#'' in your dotqmail file for postmaster. and NO - why not ?? What if for some strange reason someone starts spamming from your mail server. I would like to be able to send an email to postmaster to inform of the criminal act. If I don't hear back from postmaster in 24 hours I will submit your domain to one of the open relay lists thus blocking your IP from sending mail to those who participate. Is that incentive enough? Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:32am up 3 days, 34 min, 10 users, load average: 1.13, 1.18, 1.17
Re: SMTP routing based on From: address?
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:39:22 GMT, "Grant Edwards" wrote: It's sort of an odd request, but I'd like to route outgoing mail to one of two SMTP servers, but I don't want to do it based on the destination address. I would like to do it based on the From: address in the header. You could probably handle something like this in ~alias/.qmail-default and then based on the local part in the address reinject the message to the *real* mail server. Andy
Re: svscan does not recurse into subdirectories
Thus said Mario Thaten on Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:44:25 +0100: From the docs of svscan I learned, that "svscan starts a pair of supervise processes, one for sub, one for sub/log, with a pipe between them.", but this effect does not take place, and I really don't know, what the problem might be. You must have missed the part about the stick bit eh? svscan will only supervise the log directory if the it is set on the parent directory. chmod +t /supervise/qmail/* Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 6:06pm up 100 days, 20:27, 7 users, load average: 1.17, 1.12, 1.09
Re: tcp.smtp file
Thus said "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" on Wed, 07 Feb 2001 15:11:28 EST: What is the proper format for the tcp.smtp file in regards to multiple class c networks. For example 209.168.128-143.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" This seems to be consistent with http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp/tcprules.html in the ``Address ranges'' section: tcprules treats 1.2.3.37-53:ins as an abbreviation for the rules 1.2.3.37:ins, 1.2.3.38:ins, and so on up through 1.2.3.53:ins. Similarly, 10.2-3.:ins is an abbreviation for 10.2.:ins and 10.3.:ins. So, it looks like you can do entire CIDR blocks by specifying a range. There is no need for individual entries. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 6:47pm up 97 days, 21:07, 5 users, load average: 1.10, 1.16, 1.11
Re: How does SVSCAN work ?
Thus said "dennis" on Mon, 05 Feb 2001 13:23:55 +1100: I must be as thick as two short planks but for the file of me I can't get my head around how SVSCAN works. Can someone please enlighten me, PLEASE !! svscan ``scans'' the directory that you give it for other directories. For each directory it finds, it spawns a supervise process that monitors the service defined in the run file found in that directory. If a supervise process (which monitors a service) dies for some odd reason it will restart another supervise process on that directory to keep the service running. That's all it does, plain and simple. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:10pm up 95 days, 31 min, 6 users, load average: 1.09, 1.15, 1.13
Re: mail loops back to me (MX problem?)
On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:56:26 +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote: sendmail[23266]: OAA23264: to=toto@the_virtual_vpopdomain_on_the_machine, ctladdr=the_sender_on_the_machine (50011/50012), delay=00:00:00, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=esmtp, relay=the_virtual_vpopdomain_on_the_machine. [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx], stat=Local configuration error This message is unreadable (what encryption standard is this, and where is the key?) You need to put on your sendmail Urim and Thummim[1] Seriously: you molested the log output. Please provide real log output, this is confusing. It is not even qmail output... :-) Andy [1] If you don't know what this is see the following: http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=booleanq1=urimoperator1=Orq2=thummimoperator2=Andq3=rgn=verserestrict=Allsize=First+100
Re: Secure IMAP server
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:32:13 +0100, Felix von Leitner wrote: That is not sufficient. That was my point. Not having seen a security audit, nor looked at the code myself, there is not solid claim to security. That said, I use the imapd myself. We use it here as well on production systems. While I would not trust it as much as an imapd from djb, it seems to be the best alternative. Please note that IMAP is a large and complicated protocol. It is difficult to make it right because of the complexity. My point exactly. Since there is no other alternative at this time then it wins out by default. Compared to the rest of the imapd that exist courier-imap works best with the our current needs. Andy
Re: Sorry about the size of my prevous e-mail (I have beem flamed on this before).
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:48:21 +0200, "Alex Kramarov" wrote: I do not use a broken MUA. I use an MUA that helps me construct a more personal e-mail by adding backgrounds and other multimedia elements. If you want to check that out, there is a link to it's site on the bottom of my e-mail. Noone I have sent a customised e-mail have ever complained, except (understandably) people on this list, and only because it was sent in error. I think, that in the future If it's so configurable, can you customize it to wrap lines properly ad a reasonbale length please? Andy p.s and turn off the HTML if you can... :-)
Re: Secure IMAP server
Thus said Rahsheen Porter on Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:27:14 EST: I'm extremely happy with qmail and the other software available from DJB, but I've yet to hear anything about an IMAP server that takes security into consideration. I'm running Courier-IMAP right now, but I haven't actually opened the port to the world yet because I'm not confident in it's security (since I can't seem to find any docs on it that mention the word). Why would you be more confident in an IMAP daemon from DJB? (No offense DJB). Why are you not confident in it's security? While courier-imap isn't coded in the same style that DJB uses, I do believe that it has been built with security in mind. Having said that, I cannot say for certain that it *is* indeed secure merely because I have not seen a security audit on the code, but I do believe for the most part it is secure. For more on it's security I believe there is a document called SECURITY in the code tree somewhere which discusses it's approach to security---you might have a look at that. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:26pm up 88 days, 1:46, 5 users, load average: 1.04, 1.09, 1.08
Re: Specific IP
Thus said Linux on Sat, 27 Jan 2001 14:24:39 +0100: There is a method to run qmail on a specific IP address. For example binding on 111.222.222.222:25 instead of 0.0.0.0:25 This is the job of tcpserver... find your invocation of tcpserver and change the 0 to 111.222.222.222. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 9:34am up 86 days, 11:55, 6 users, load average: 1.05, 1.17, 1.15
Re: What variables are available inside of .qmail-*?
Thus said Peter Green on Sat, 27 Jan 2001 22:28:12 EST: Also, if you ever have any doubt, create a temporary .qmail file for a user that reads: env/tmp/qmail.env Don't forget the pipe... :-) | env /tmp/qmail.env Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:57pm up 87 days, 1:17, 5 users, load average: 1.14, 1.32, 1.33
Wildcards in badmailfrom?
Hey all, I have a really annoying spammer on my hands and just wonder if it is possible to use wildcards in badmailfrom? Originally I added [EMAIL PROTECTED] to badmailfrom and that blocked it for about a month. Then he got halfway smart and changed his sender address to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for which I added @tpts6.seed.net.tw to badmailfrom. This however, only worked for a few minutes as he is apparently starting to create random names for mail hosts. Here is a list that I have collected so far @tpts4.seed.net.tw @mx.seed.net.tw @ara.seed.net.tw @tpts6.seed.net.tw @sky.seed.net.tw @iris.seed.net.tw @giga.net.tw @party.seed.net.tw @ksmail.seed.net.tw @saturn.seed.net.tw @tpts7.seed.net.tw Now, my question is, would it be possible to block as in @*.seed.net.tw Thanks. I guess I could always try it to see what it does but I would rather know before hand---the man page doesn't mention anything about wildcards. Andy
Re: Wildcards in badmailfrom?
On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:40:12 CST, Charles Cazabon wrote: Someone posted a patch to do this some time ago. You could search the qmail list archives for it, or look at qmail.org for a pointer. I think it was called 'badrcptpatterns' or something similar. Yes, thanks to another poster I found the wildmat program/patch that will add this into it. I seached for ``wildcard'' instead of ``regex'' on qmail.org which is why I didn't see it the first time... Andy
Re: Virus-ridden emails from 'funky gao'?
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 08:02:44 EST, "Hubbard, David" wrote: Is everyone else receiving a bunch of emails from 'funky gao'? Can someone remove this [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the list? I've received quite a few messages from him this morning, all containing the file Emanuel.exe with a virus. Yes, I have been receiving these as well. Our mail server with qmail-scanner has rejected 16 so far. They are probably not going back to him so he may not even be aware... Andy
Re: A firestorm of protest?
Thus said "Robin S. Socha" on 16 Jan 2001 20:47:55 +0100: A module is not a patch. You can apply as many well written modules as you like - but you cannot simply patch away at an existing code base. Unless you write code in Lisp... :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 7:16pm up 75 days, 21:36, 5 users, load average: 1.38, 1.35, 1.38
Re: hrm....pop3d
Thus said "Kurth Bemis" on Sun, 14 Jan 2001 00:11:57 EST: Jan 12 06:54:30 noname pop3d: 979300470.784986 tcpserver: fatal: unable to figure out port number for pop-3 Jan 12 06:54:31 noname qmail: 979300471.799484 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 My guess would be that you specified pop-3 in your start script, however, pop-3 does not exist in /etc/protocols Check that an if that's not your problem you will need to provide more details about how you setup your pop3 script. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:19pm up 73 days, 39 min, 5 users, load average: 1.09, 1.06, 1.07
Re: hrm....pop3d
Thus said Andy Bradford on Sat, 13 Jan 2001 22:19:11 MST: My guess would be that you specified pop-3 in your start script, however, pop-3 does not exist in /etc/protocols Oops, make that /etc/services (I hate replying to my own replies) :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:28pm up 73 days, 48 min, 5 users, load average: 1.13, 1.16, 1.11
Re: qmail-1.03-6.src.rpm
Thus said "Keith Smith" on Wed, 10 Jan 2001 18:56:09 MST: I received an error ""Shadow-Utils is needed by qmail-1.03-6 Sounds like you need to install the shadow-utils RPM... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:41pm up 70 days, 1:02, 6 users, load average: 1.36, 1.22, 1.14
Re: help needed
On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 18:50:29 EST, wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: x.x.x.x does not like recipient. Remote host said: 554 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Recipient address rejected: Relay access denied Giving up on x.x.x.x. Hmm, this is not a qmail error message. In fact, if I do the following it looks like you are connecting to a Postfix machine: [andyb@work:desk andyb]$ telnet 24.165.127.56 25 Trying 24.165.127.56... Connected to 24.165.127.56. Escape character is '^]'. 220 pagan.madhorizons.com ESMTP Postfix (Postfix-19991231-pl08) (Linux-Mandrake) MAIL FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 Ok RCPT TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 554 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Recipient address rejected: Relay access denied QUIT 221 Bye Connection closed by foreign host. Looks like you forgot to disable Postfix or something... Andy
Re: control/mailroutes (was: QMTP autoreply tester)
Thus said Ricardo Cerqueira on Sun, 07 Jan 2001 01:50:16 GMT: Hmmm... OK, disregard my previous mail. Personally, I'd rather have one file for SMTP, and another for QMTP. Does anyone else here agree with me? This seems more logical to me as it allows finer control over the entire system. Oh well, I suppose it isn't critical as qmail-remote will just have to determine which to use by probing I guess---unless of course it is accompanied by a port number on which QMTP runs. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:28pm up 66 days, 48 min, 4 users, load average: 1.25, 1.15, 1.10
Re: rcpthosts - IP addresses not allowed?
On Thu, 04 Jan 2001 13:38:56 EST, Bernard Karmilowicz wrote: I am trying to send mail from host FROM_HOST (1.2.3.4) to host TO_HOST (1.2.3.5). The mail is addressed to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". qmail is running on both hosts. Unfortunately, TO_HOST refuses the mail. However, TO_HOST will accept the mail if it is addressed to "user@domain". Try sending to user@[1.2.3.5] instead... Andy
Re: Hy.....
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:17:40 +0200, Seby wrote: How can i configure qmail to allow a users to send emails only to the localhost.. and to can not send emails romote (to another host) echo 0 /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote Might do the trick---but I believe that would just hold the mail in the queue until it timed out. That may not be exactly what you're looking for. Andy
Re: AntiVirus!
On Tue, 05 Dec 2000 02:18:33 +0100, Felix von Leitner wrote: By the way, about the discussion about the net worth of virus scanners, please have a look a the email I just got (no, I am not making this up): I can verify this---I too received a similar bounce from their group and sent them back a *fix your MTA* email. They responded and said that they had removed the person that was subscribed (not fixing the root of the problem). In fact, it was to the same [EMAIL PROTECTED] address. Andy
Re: Please Ignore
Thus said "montgomery f. tidwell" on Thu, 30 Nov 2000 18:59:32 PST: sorry for all the tests. this is the only mail list that will accept my Sender: messed up emails. That's because qmail doesn't care about the Sender header... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 9:29pm up 28 days, 23:49, 4 users, load average: 1.19, 1.39, 1.44
Re: Minimum OS Requirement to run Qmail
Thus said Andrew Buenaventura on Fri, 01 Dec 2000 11:56:36 +0800: I am going to setup a dedicated linux box that will run qmail only. What is the most minimum package that I need to install from Red Hat 7.0 to be able to run Qmail? I do not want unnecessary services/daemons running on that box. I will also be installing the web based email package that runs on qmail. You really should know this---if you don't then I wouldn't recommend trying to install qmail until you do. However, just to get you started, you could probably get away with a minimal install and have everything you need. Good luck. Andy p.s. Unless you are installing a binary RPM of qmail you will also need to know how to compile and which packages are required for doing so. -- [---[system uptime]] 9:39pm up 28 days, 23:58, 4 users, load average: 1.24, 1.26, 1.33
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Thus said "asantos" on Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:13:18 -0100: For someone with such a doubtfull sense of humour as he shows to have welcoming IE users the way he does at http://socha.net/, he seems to be inordinately proud of listing among his "computer skills" Microsoft Office. Bah! That's a lot nicer than what I used to have on my webpage: http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/fun.html Andy p.s. only works with 9x not NT [---[system uptime]] 5:35pm up 27 days, 19:55, 2 users, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Thus said Jamin Collins on Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:45:04 CST: * 6 attribution lines Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? * No citation leader Once again. Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? * Trailing blank line And yet again. Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? Ok, You need to spend more time in the books and less time flapping the jaw. Each one of those violates RFC 1855 to some extent. Here is the link to the RFC and just to make things easy on you, I will quote relevant parts of it here (you should still read it though): - Be brief without being overly terse. When replying to a message, include enough original material to be understood but no more. It is extremely bad form to simply reply to a message by including all the previous message: edit out all the irrelevant material. * Did you do this? - Do not include control characters or non-ASCII attachments in messages unless they are MIME attachments or unless your mailer encodes these. If you send encoded messages make sure the recipient can decode them. * Are you 100% certain that everyone on the list can read your goofy windows font/content-type - Wait overnight to send emotional responses to messages. If you have really strong feelings about a subject, indicate it via FLAME ON/OFF enclosures. For example: FLAME ON: This type of argument is not worth the bandwidth it takes to send it. It's illogical and poorly reasoned. The rest of the world agrees with me. FLAME OFF * Is not your original post based on emotional response to someone elses? Just because they respond emotionally, does that justify your ignorance of the same? - A good rule of thumb: Be conservative in what you send and liberal in what you receive. You should not send heated messages (we call these "flames") even if you are provoked. On the other hand, you shouldn't be surprised if you get flamed and it's prudent not to respond to flames. * No comment. Cheers, Andy p.s. BTW, this applies to anyone on the list---not that I am a netiquette cop by any means. ;-) -- [---[system uptime]] 7:58pm up 27 days, 22:18, 4 users, load average: 1.06, 1.21, 1.23
Re: newbie need help
Thus said Arif Rudiana on Thu, 30 Nov 2000 10:14:42 +0700: to find in archive files... I think it's better to post my questions to this millist Please turn of HTML in your emails. ;-) in recipient the sender username appears like this [EMAIL PROTECTED] what should i do if i want in recipients the sender username appear like : [EMAIL PROTECTED] without sis01 You should probably configure this in your clients but if they are sending mail directly from the server then you will probably also want to read the man page for qmail-send and qmail-inject and read up on setting "envnoathost" and/or "defaultdomain" in /var/qmail/control second: there is no problem if our email server received mail from users with domains .telkom.co.id but we have trouble if receiving mail from another domain (like .com , .org , .indosat.co.id and so on) . is there any something wrong with our qmail's configutaration? or our problem come from outside ( like proxy or DNS Server) ? As far as I can tell there are network problems. I cannot traceroute to your host, nor can I even ping it. DNS seems to resolve it fine and it will also return the proper MX so my guess is that you have some network problems (maybe not in your network). Here is the final part of a traceroute: 15 hssi1-0-gw3.cibinong.telkom.net.id (202.134.3.2) 762.458 ms 715.068 ms 761.583 ms 16 FE4-1-0-sm2.jakarta.telkom.net.id (202.134.3.133) 713.796 ms 708.392 ms 765.980 ms 17 S12-1-5.kbl.surabaya.telkom.net.id (202.134.3.38) 908.190 ms 828.817 ms 952.539 ms 18 S0-0.jpt.bandung.telkom.net.id (202.134.3.49) 915.910 ms 955.823 ms 934.870 ms 19 * * * 20 * * * This continues until it reaches the maximum hop count. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:12pm up 28 days, 1:31, 4 users, load average: 1.48, 1.35, 1.22
Re: changing to tcpserver
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:06:03 EST, Dave Sill wrote: I recommend copying and pasting the scripts, rather than typing them in by hand. Unless you're in Florida, in which case, entering manually is more accurate. ROTFLOL!!! This has got to be one of the best Florida jokes I have seen. :-) Andy
Re: Henning Brauer's reply
Thus said Chris Olson on Tue, 28 Nov 2000 00:28:26 CST: I believe I'm no more braindead than you are. At least I have the common courtesy to not post a derogatory statement like this on the list, nor would I even send a private email to anyone containing a Granted, it is pretty rude to send derogatory statements to the list---he/she was probably just having a bad day. Maybe a good review of RFC 1855 would be in order. :-) ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1855.txt I can assure you that I did not intend to waste yours or anybody else's time, nor did I intend to waste list bandwidth. I for one did not think it was a waste of bandwidth, however, I must admit I did think it quite a trivial question---but, since you are new to qmail and linux and possibly the whole *NIX mentality I'm sure you have a handful. Did you suddenly inherit someone else's job? And speaking of wasting bandwidth, why do you (and many others) reply to list messages and the reply goes to both the list and to the original poster's private email address? Is it so hard to edit the original Some people actually don't mind receiving two copies---I for one do not. Some mailing lists tend to be slow and if I am in a hurry I appreciate the quick delivery of the message that was sent directly to my mailbox. That is one of the reasons to use filters when participating on mailing lists. Try setting mail-followup-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] in your mail headers when posting to this list if you don't want a duplicate copy. A few of the mailers on this list support it and the "reply-to-all" will usually do the Right Thing(tm). (BTW, I'm risking getting flamed for mentioning this header...) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:13am up 26 days, 2:32, 5 users, load average: 1.14, 1.27, 1.31
Re: auto append signature file to all outgoing messages
Thus said Romeyn Prescott on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:52:05 EST: There may be others. I have no idea if this will work. It may work for a few cases, but with today's mailiers, it most likely will corrupt the message or not be seen at all. Consider the different Content-Type made available in most of todays MUA: multipart/mixed multipart/alternative text/html Without parsing the message in some fashion it will most likely not work properly. Now, if your company's mail policy/standard is to only send text/plain messages then you might be able to get away with it... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 5:43pm up 23 days, 20:02, 5 users, load average: 1.13, 1.21, 1.21
Re: Hostname Lookup
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 08:21:10 EST, Warren Small wrote: I'm sure a lot of you will say that the problem is obviously a DNS lookup issue but I can lookup this server name successfully from the same server that is having problems talking to the qmail server. This problem is also not confined to one server and I can change the configuration to send the mail to our current mail hub and it will be delivered successfully. I hate to state the obvious, but yes, it is obviously a problem with DNS. Sure, the hostname resolves fine, but your DNS does not return an MX for it. See results below: [andy@mail andy]$ dnsmx qmail.mainstream.net dnsmx: fatal: unable to find MX records for qmail.mainstream.net: temporary failure This should, in the very least return a preference of 0 for the server itself. Instead it is failing---something is misconfigured in your DNS. The same results can be found with dig: [andy@mail andy]$ dig qmail.mainstream.net mx ; DiG 8.1 qmail.mainstream.net mx ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 40425 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; qmail.mainstream.net, type = MX, class = IN Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe it is a problem with DNS. :-) Andy
Re: How insall qmail relay server in an DMZ
Thus said Jose AP Celestino on Wed, 22 Nov 2000 01:38:39 GMT: Have you tried rtfm. There's plenty of stuff on this. Why don't you RTFM on your MUA so you don't send out duplicate emails to the mailing list... sheesh. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 8:53pm up 19 days, 23:13, 4 users, load average: 1.64, 1.39, 1.30
Re: sending messages from sysadm to users
Thus said David Ryan on Wed, 22 Nov 2000 16:13:43 +1100: The main difference is that I do not want them to be able to reply-to-all. I had used a mailing list but someone did a reply-to-all and caused all sorts of trouble. Use ezmlm to setup a mailing list and then make the list moderated so only you can post to the list. Then, even if they do a reply-to-all it will only be approved by you (or bounced back if you don't want to accept any posts). You could probably concoct your own solution using .qmail files, however, I think ezmlm would be easier. :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 10:50pm up 20 days, 1:09, 3 users, load average: 1.45, 1.50, 1.23
Re: return receipts
Thus said "David L. Nicol" on Mon, 20 Nov 2000 20:12:46 CST: What about the "notification on delivery" stuff -- is that not an MTA feature? Is it deprecated? Rather it would be a feature of the MDA, has anyone added it to qmail-local? You mean something like what is covered in "man qreceipt" ? It depends on what the user is expecting I guess... If it is Disposition-Notification-To then it has nothing to do with the MTA, however, if it is Notice-Requested-Upon-Delivery-To then that is covered... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 8:24pm up 18 days, 22:43, 4 users, load average: 1.11, 1.11, 1.04
Re: secrets and lies
Thus said Raul Miller on Sun, 19 Nov 2000 12:33:30 EST: Or do you have similar problems deciding whether ATM means automated teller machine or asychronous transfer mode? Or deciding whether ASP means active server pages or application service provider? Or ... Not generally, however, I must admit that when... [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Don't care. What I care about is what the words mean in an actual language. In this case English. I do not recognize OSI as a standards body and do not care what definition of Open Source can be found at opensource.org or the I was thrown off for a bit---I have never seen Open Source Initiative turned into an acronym, so the first time I say OSI I immediately thought he had qualms with the OSI model, because that was the only instance of OSI that I had ever seen (and I have been using "open source" software for a while now). Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:19pm up 17 days, 14:39, 4 users, load average: 1.20, 1.35, 1.31
Re: secrets and lies
Thus said "Michael T. Babcock" on Sat, 18 Nov 2000 13:41:20 EST: OSI == "Open Source Initiative" I believe ... That's funny, I always thought that OSI was the _Open Systems Interconnection_ internet model proposed by the ISO. I guess this goes to show that context really does matter. :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:52am up 16 days, 14:11, 4 users, load average: 1.28, 1.33, 1.29
Re: Adding CR to bare LFs
Thus said "Casey Allen Shobe" on Sat, 18 Nov 2000 03:30:55 EST: Hi there, I run a webmail service, and am having some trouble. It appears that not all web browsers send CRLF, but instead send LF only when I compose (this is the fault of the widget used for entering email). It has nothing to do with the composition of the email whatsoever---it's the transmission of the email during the SMTP dialog that is the problem. Both Netscape 6 for Linux and Konqueror 2 have this problem, as well as a bundle of other unix browsers I'm sure. Is there a way I can have qmail automatically convert bare LFs to CRLFs? This would be *very* helpful. Otherwise, I'm going to have to figure out how to write some PHP into my webmail service to do it... I believe there is a program called fixcr but I'm not entirely certain what it is used for (see man pages). Probably what you should do instead is fix your mail injecting webmail service---that's where the problem is. On a side note, how are you injecting the email in your webmail? Are you using PHP to communicate via SMTP to the mail server? If so, you are going to need to ensure that it communicates properly. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:59am up 16 days, 14:19, 4 users, load average: 1.20, 1.24, 1.26
Re: RFC822 compliant?
Thus said [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun, 12 Nov 2000 11:54:48 CST: So you're basically saying that qmail can pretty much mung up an e-mail address any way it likes because it's...qmail! No, he is not saying that at all. qmail out-of-the-box will not munge anything. What that user was asking is clearly a case of user error and misconfiguration. It has nothing to do with any RFCs whatsoever. There is nothing to protect the user from telling qmail to do the Wrong Thing(tm), just like there is nothing stopping the user from doing "rm -rf /" when logged in as root. That seems to sum up the attitude around here: Qmail is great, don't dare question its merits. I don't see that attitude at all---this problem is clearly not due to qmail, but rather the way the user configures it. Sorry to obscure the issue with facts. I can see why qmail is still stuck at 1.03, given the support of folks like yourself. That's not the reason why it is *stuck* at 1.03---what does free support have to do with versioning of a program?!? You clearly have obscured the issue with facts. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:08pm up 10 days, 14:27, 4 users, load average: 2.40, 2.18, 1.73
Re: Script for adding new qmailusers
Thus said defender of the protocol on Fri, 10 Nov 2000 21:24:59 EST: someone correct me if im wrong, but when i add a user (to users/assign, i have all virtualdomains), i run qmail-newu and SIGHUP qmail-send, so yeah There is no need to HUP qmail-send unless virtualdomains or locals has changed. You can add and remove users from users/assign at will without restarting anything. The only thing that needs to be done is create the new cdb with qmail-newu. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 7:29pm up 8 days, 21:49, 4 users, load average: 1.22, 1.32, 1.29
Re: cc incoming mail
Thus said Kimberly Vher on Fri, 10 Nov 2000 13:35:34: so that i have a copy in my hotmail account. but i want to make a copy to multiple address how can i do that? Just put in multiple addresses in the .qmail file---they should each be separated by a newline. That's all folks. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:03pm up 8 days, 1:22, 3 users, load average: 1.27, 1.27, 1.24
Re: New Mail Notification (with VMailMgr, advanced, not qbiff etc)
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 14:24:11 GMT, "Michael Vorburger" wrote: I need to implement a New Mail Notification; not for login like qbiff etc, but more like notifiying users on another external email, SMS etc in the future. So a simple forward won't do, I need to call some external script each time new mail comes in. This is what I do. I have a dot-qmail file that looks like this: | if grep -i "^$SENDER" $HOME/.qmailpage /dev/null; then sed -n -f |$HOME/bin/mail2page.sed | qmail-inject -f$SENDER [EMAIL PROTECTED]; exit 0; |else echo "You are noth authorized to send me a page"; exit 100; fi | /usr/local/bin/maildrop The first pipe will check that the sender is valid, and if so it will allow the page through. Here are the contents of mail2page.sed: /^From:/p /^Subject:/p This works very well, provided that no on knows the real email address of the pager and they don't spoof the SENDER. You could modify this script not to return an error code, or not even check the sender for that matter. :-) Andy
Re: Quota on outgoing mail
Thus said Jens Georg on Sat, 04 Nov 2000 19:49:57 +0100: echo 10485760 /var/qmail/control/databytes is this really enough ? i remember to read once that qmail has to be compiled specially to use this feature. Yes, this really is all that needs to be done---no special compiling or patches. Read the man pages and you'll see. ;-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:56am up 2 days, 14:15, 5 users, load average: 1.17, 1.19, 1.18
Re: (Fwd) failure notice
Thus said Brett Randall on 03 Nov 2000 13:44:59 +1100: In-Reply-To (note caps)...I will make it case insensitive for future cases. Apologies to Phil and anyone else who has received this error... I believe all headers should be treated case insensitive... :-) Kind of nice that it's working to some extent though isn't it? I need to start implementing something like this. I get over 90 SPAM a month on this email account. Granted, I have a heavy set of procmail filters setup and I only see 1% of them, but it also catches some valid emails... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 9:54pm up 1 day, 13 min, 4 users, load average: 1.31, 1.31, 1.27
Re: Return receipt
On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:28:09 +0100, Enrique wrote: Qmail doesn't support "return receipt". Any solution for this?. Return receipt is not at all a function of the underlying MTA. All you really need is to include a Disposition-Notification-To header in every outgoing mail with the address that you want it to go to. This has nothing to do with qmail, but it has everything to do with the client you are using. Andy
Re: FILTERING ATTACHEMENTS
Thus said "Anthony Abby" on Sat, 28 Oct 2000 22:29:41 EDT: 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. You should use ezmlm as your list management software. It has an option where you can tell it to strip out attachments of arbitrary MIME types. I believe this is the -x option. See www.ezmlm.org for more details and you might consider subscribing to the ezmlm mailing list as well... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 11:46am up 22 days, 16:13, 4 users, load average: 1.33, 1.34, 1.24
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Thus said [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun, 29 Oct 2000 01:00:11 MST: 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. :) That's a good idea Russ. It is a very good idea, however, you have to absolutely trust the people you give out the extension to. The first time they send out one of those dumb _forward this to as many people as you can_ type emails then the cat is out of the bag. You could then delete the extension and inform them not to do it again and give them a new one. This, however, only applies if you actually see that they have made such a blunder. :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:01pm up 22 days, 16:28, 4 users, load average: 1.25, 1.26, 1.26
Re: people are definately starting to harvest emailadresses on this list...
Thus said Brett Randall on 28 Oct 2000 22:28:51 +1100: 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). His name is Chris. I haven't yet put his system to test yet, but I can attest that it works pretty nicely. Here is the webpage if you are interested: http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:20pm up 22 days, 16:47, 4 users, load average: 1.33, 1.29, 1.27
Re: FILTERING ATTACHEMENTS
Thus said "Anthony Abby" on Sun, 29 Oct 2000 15:38:38 EST: Andy, I appreciate the advice, but I like LISTAR much better. The feature set looks to be fuller to me than does EZMLM. All I want to do is strip out attachements at the SMTP level. Is that possible? No, it is not possible to strip attachments at the SMTP level. SMTP knows nothing of the contents of the message. SMTP is for mail transfer only, not filtering. You could roll your own type of attachment stripping routines though---and possibly even look at how ezmlm is doing it---that strip attachments before handing it over to the mailing list software. This would probably need to be done using a dot-qmail but my guess is that you could do it with a nice perl script or whatever language you are familiar with. All this seems unecessarily superfluous since ezmlm already handles this nicely, but it sounds like you want your own solution... :-) Andy p.s. If LISTAR has such a big feature list, why can't it do the stripping for you?!? ;-) -- [---[system uptime]] 2:03pm up 22 days, 18:30, 3 users, load average: 1.01, 1.06, 1.09
Re: Resending large bulks of mail!
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:50:46 +0200, "Wilson, Frank" wrote: This means of course, that when mail.web-trade.com is down, the mail will be stored localy in the postmaster account on be.wise.no. You must have configured it do deliver email locally then. If you simply accept the mail and not deliver it, it should remain in that mail server's queue until it can forward it on to mail.web-trade.com Andy
Re: unsubscribe qmail
Thus said Daniel Augusto Fernandes on Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:07:49 -0200: You should look at the mail header of this message and see what's your address. The very first (mostly) is something like this: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unfortunately, the return-path may not always be available... My ISP for instance uses exim which must be stripping the Return-Path header because emails that I get through them never have it. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 6:56pm up 20 days, 22:23, 4 users, load average: 1.15, 1.29, 1.25
Re: unsubscribe qmail
Thus said Adam McKenna on Fri, 27 Oct 2000 17:51:03 EDT: That's why ezmlm creates a random tag for each subscription that is sent back to the subscriber for confirmation. There is no way to subscribe someone else to an ezmlm list unless you have access to their mail spool. Then, what is to be done in the event that the reply-to header is set as well and it is different from the from? I believe that the sender is the most reliable for subscription/unsubscription. It probably wouldn't be hard to patch ezmlm to use from though if you wanted. :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 7:07pm up 20 days, 22:34, 4 users, load average: 1.06, 1.17, 1.21
Re: Problem with sqwebmail + qmail-scanner
Thus said [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:26:33 GMT: I have noticed that it is possible to send infected messages with sqwebmail running qmail-scanner. I guess sqwebmail put messages directly in the queue, so it no qmail-smptd is called and no antivirus is used. I don't see how you could do this with sqwebmail unless you are forwarding on messages that someone sent you. I am not aware of any email *virus* for sqwebmail and you most certainly won't be sending one out with it when you simply hit "Create message" As far as I know, it is not susceptible to the strain of kiddie *virus* that most Microsludge mailers are. :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 7:11pm up 20 days, 22:38, 4 users, load average: 1.33, 1.22, 1.21
Re: What to do about these barelinefeeds?
Thus said "Hubbard, David" on Thu, 26 Oct 2000 23:31:01 EDT: verify that since I don't have a mailer to try it with but it seems that you'd never want the 451 in this case because obviously it will be the same mailer that will retry each time and it will continue to be broken for each try... You don't need a MUA to do this. You can use netcat to simulate this type of an environment... http://www.l0pht.com/~weld/netcat/ Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 9:51pm up 20 days, 1:18, 3 users, load average: 1.17, 1.22, 1.24
Re: Maildir search tools?
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:12:14 +0200, "Mark Weinem" wrote: Are there any search tools (like grepmail) for Maildirs? Well, you could use a combination of grep and find maybe... or even iterate over the files found by find and grep on those, whatever... I can think of a number of different possible ways to 'grep' through Maildirs... Andy
Re: any comment on this line
Thus said "Yamin Prabudy" on Tue, 24 Oct 2000 13:31:42 +0700: My friend forwad it to me from http://www.orbs.org/otherresource.html The URL is actually: http://www.orbs.org/otherresources.html I suggest you read it and then take your pick which you want to use... When qmail is configured properly you will have no problems just as the blurb says, however, it can produce bad results just like any other piece of misconfigured software. If you follow the directions for installation at http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html you shouldn't have any problems. Tell your friend he is misinformed... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:28am up 17 days, 3:55, 6 users, load average: 1.53, 1.42, 1.44
Re: wildcards in virtualdomains
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000 20:57:22 BST, "ROD" wrote: I have read qmail-send but still i'm still a bit unclear to how to doit. Would info.@thenewdawn:ezmlm-test send anything with info.*@thenewdawn to the ezmlm-test? e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wildcards in virtualdomains
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000 20:57:22 BST, "ROD" wrote: Would info.@thenewdawn:ezmlm-test send anything with info.*@thenewdawn to the ezmlm-test? e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sorry about that last blank email... I accidentally hit ctrl-s instead of ctrl-d. :-) Anyway, no you cannot use wildcard matching in this way, however, you could create an alias that handles *all* email for a given virtual domain as in: thenewdawn.com:thenewdawn Then in ~alias have .qmail-thenewdawn-info With the proper mail delivery directives. Then if you wanted another, say [EMAIL PROTECTED] you would create ~alias/.qmail-thenewdawn-info:sales Andy p.s. please, someone correct me if I'm wrong. :-)
Re: wildcards in virtualdomains
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000 15:35:07 MDT, Andy Bradford wrote: thenewdawn.com:thenewdawn I think I made a mistake... I believe it should be: thenewdawn.com:alias-thenewdawn Andy
Re: Bogus MAIL FROM (SPAM)
Thus said "Aaron Newcomb" on Sun, 15 Oct 2000 01:26:30 EDT: Yes. That makes sense. I knew there had to be a way. Thanks for the help. The most offending address is 210.133.28.162. Ok Aaron, This host is definitely a spammers delight---it's known as an Open Relay. This means that it will relay email from any email address to any other. This apparently has been submitted to ORBS, but not yet made it into RBL. See here: http://www.orbs.org/verify.php3?address=210.133.28.162 I just tested it myself and the mail did arrive in my mailbox through their server. What you should do is block it with tcpserver---whatever you do, don't switch to inetd, you're on the right track with tcpserver. Do as Chris suggested and then recompile your tcp.smtp.cdb or whatever you called the cdb. Additionally, you might want to report them to www.mail-abuse.org as an Open Relay. See the instructions on their webpage for how to deal with spammers and how to report to them. Once they are in the RBL they will not be able to send to a large part of the Internet. (BTW, does anyone really know how many companies/ISPs use RBL?) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 3:01am up 8 days, 6:28, 5 users, load average: 1.00, 1.09, 1.08
Re: Bogus MAIL FROM (SPAM)
Thus said "Aaron Newcomb" on Fri, 13 Oct 2000 23:19:48 EDT: Notice that the HELO and the MAIL FROM: lines have completely different domains. The MAIL FROM they are using is a bogus address. What is the best way to prevent email like this from being accepted? Without some hacking you won't be able to block based on the From: header, however you can block based on the sender envelope. See the man page for qmail-smtpd which specifically references the use of the badmailfrom control file. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:54am up 7 days, 4:21, 6 users, load average: 1.35, 1.33, 1.20
Re: Newbie Configuration questions...
Thus said "Todd McGuinness" on Sat, 14 Oct 2000 15:27:06 PDT: authetication config... The error I receive in the browser window is: server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration. I have a couple users on this site and I don't really want to set up virtual domains, but I do want to pick up mail from the web, any suggestions? This question would be more appropriate on the sqwebmail list. The most common reason why you get this error is because you don't have a Maildir for it to read. You should also be running qmail in ./Maildir/ delivery mode for mail to be found by sqwebmail at all... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 2:36pm up 7 days, 18:03, 5 users, load average: 1.42, 1.32, 1.28
Re: How to send to all for a webmaster
Thus said szq79 on Thu, 12 Oct 2000 06:03:45: I have linux and qmail installed. You know, as a webmaster, sometime send a letter to everyone is needed for a webmaster.I don't know how to do this.Please tell me. There are a number of ways to approach this of which here are two: 1. put all the 'webmaster' usernames in ~alias/.qmail-webmaster as in: user1 user2 user3 or if webmaster is an actual user on the system, 2. put all the 'webmaster' usernames in ~webmaster/.qmail followed by a delivery to ./Maildir/ (or ./Mailbox if that is your default delivery mode). Something like user1 user2 user3 ./Maildir/ This only applies if I have interpreted your email correctly. ;-) If this doesn't work then I probably misunderstood... Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 12:48am up 5 days, 4:15, 4 users, load average: 1.08, 1.08, 1.08
Re: OT: a real MUA for X? (was qmail list reply-to)
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 22:04:14 PDT, Mike Glover wrote: Okay, so does anybody know of a "real" MUA that is X-enhanced? Sorry, but "pretty" is more of a concern to me than "works properly in strange situations". I would prefer "not outright broken" and "not vaporware", though. I personally like EXMH and use it both at work and at home. http://www.beedub.com/exmh/ It doesn't support IMAP, but can use POP3 for accessing email. The interface is decent (for an application written in Tcl/Tk). It can also be customized, handles PGP signatures very well and does well with MIME attachments too... :-) Andy
Re: smtp speed limit??
On Wed, 11 Oct 2000 19:12:42 EDT, Chris Johnson wrote: If I were troubleshooting a communication problem between two hosts, and on one end of the connection was some piece of Microsoft software, and on the other end of the connection was some software written by Dan Bernstein, can you guess where I'd start looking for the problem? I know where I would look, but just because it is DJB's software doesn't mean that it was configured properly. :-) Andy
Re: Running Multiple Copies of Qmail on the same server...
Thus said "James Stevens" on Wed, 11 Oct 2000 08:04:13 PDT: Nod, I agree.. However the people I work with and especially my boss are all in love with Majordomo and I even bring up the subject of moving to another list server and I get stared at So I'm stuck with Majordomo and qmail. Hmm, how did you convince them to move to qmail over sendmail? Maybe mentioning the fact that they will gain significant performance, as well as automated bounce handling. Of course, if you enjoy deleting all those bounces (maybe that's your job security) then maybe majordomo is the right tool. :-) I'm sure if your boss was receiving all the bounces he would have a different opinion... I know how difficult it can be to get management to understand. Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 8:27pm up 4 days, 23:54, 4 users, load average: 1.39, 1.51, 1.44
Re: Maildir not working
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:37:37 -0300, Pupeno wrote: and of course the mails stays on the queue without being delivered. The directory /home/pupeno/Maildir exists: drwxr-xr-x 2 pupeno pupeno 512 Oct 9 21:19 Maildir/ How did you create the Maildir? Did you use maildirmake? If not, you probably should because it will create the rest of the directories as well as set the proper permissions in one fell swoop. My guess is that your permissions are wrong and that you don't have the subdirectories setup in the Maildir. Andy
