[spamdyke-users] Graylite and whitelist problems

2008-09-07 Thread Davide D'AMICO
Hi,
I'm using spamdyke and I like it a lot.
I encountered two problems:
1) Isn't more useful to graylist senders using their ip address rather
than only its
email address, like this:
/var/db/spamdyke/graylist/domain/rcpt/sender/ip_sender ?

2) if I include an ip address in a whitelist, I become a relay for
that ip address because
that ip address bypass ALL other filters?

Thanks in advance,
Davide
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


[spamdyke-users] strange error at log

2008-09-07 Thread nightduke
Sep  7 06:26:28 server1 spamdyke[9898]: DENIED_OTHER from:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] origin_ip: 122.99.61.133
origin_rdns: host-133.61-99-122.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw auth: (unknown)

What's denied_other?
Can anyone explain to me?

Thanks

Nightduke
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylite and whitelist problems

2008-09-07 Thread Eric Shubert
I think I can field this one. ;)

Davide D'AMICO wrote:
 Hi,
 I'm using spamdyke and I like it a lot.
 I encountered two problems:
 1) Isn't more useful to graylist senders using their ip address rather
 than only its
 email address, like this:
 /var/db/spamdyke/graylist/domain/rcpt/sender/ip_sender ?

Some large (think yahoo, gmail) mailers use server pools. Retries might be
sent from a different server, causing a message to be graylisted many times.

Personally, I think it'd be ok to use IPs for a type of whitelist after the
IP has passed graylisting. After all, once an IP has passed for one
domain/sender, wouldn't it pass for all other domain/senders too? However,
this adds another level of complexity (a pre- and a passed- gray list,
sometimes referred to as a dual key). If this proved to be a good method, a
global whitelist service based on the post-key (simply IP address), sort of
like RBLSs but RWLs, could be implemented. I don't know if anyone's pursued
such a thing or not. Seems feasible to me though.

 2) if I include an ip address in a whitelist, I become a relay for
 that ip address because
 that ip address bypass ALL other filters?

No, because authentication is still required for non-local domains. Spamdyke
filters are only bypassed if/when the sender authenticates.

 Thanks in advance,
 Davide

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylite and whitelist problems

2008-09-07 Thread Davide D'AMICO
2008/9/7 Eric Shubert [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 I think I can field this one. ;)

 Davide D'AMICO wrote:
 Hi,
 I'm using spamdyke and I like it a lot.
 I encountered two problems:
 1) Isn't more useful to graylist senders using their ip address rather
 than only its
 email address, like this:
 /var/db/spamdyke/graylist/domain/rcpt/sender/ip_sender ?

 Some large (think yahoo, gmail) mailers use server pools. Retries might be
 sent from a different server, causing a message to be graylisted many times.

 Personally, I think it'd be ok to use IPs for a type of whitelist after the
 IP has passed graylisting. After all, once an IP has passed for one
 domain/sender, wouldn't it pass for all other domain/senders too? However,
 this adds another level of complexity (a pre- and a passed- gray list,
 sometimes referred to as a dual key). If this proved to be a good method, a
 global whitelist service based on the post-key (simply IP address), sort of
 like RBLSs but RWLs, could be implemented. I don't know if anyone's pursued
 such a thing or not. Seems feasible to me though.
You are right, but server pools are well known (gmail, yahoo, msn and others)
and could be easily discovered and included in a whitelist.
A spammer tends to use only an IP address or few ip addresses, so
using a graylist
method with single ip addresses could improve security.

 2) if I include an ip address in a whitelist, I become a relay for
 that ip address because
 that ip address bypass ALL other filters?

 No, because authentication is still required for non-local domains. Spamdyke
 filters are only bypassed if/when the sender authenticates.

You are right, I think I had a problem in my configuration files.

Thanks in advance,
dave
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylite and whitelist problems

2008-09-07 Thread Eric Shubert
Davide D'AMICO wrote:
 2008/9/7 Eric Shubert [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 I think I can field this one. ;)

 Davide D'AMICO wrote:
 1) Isn't more useful to graylist senders using their ip address rather
 than only its
 email address, like this:
 /var/db/spamdyke/graylist/domain/rcpt/sender/ip_sender ?
 Some large (think yahoo, gmail) mailers use server pools. Retries might be
 sent from a different server, causing a message to be graylisted many times.

 Personally, I think it'd be ok to use IPs for a type of whitelist after the
 IP has passed graylisting. After all, once an IP has passed for one
 domain/sender, wouldn't it pass for all other domain/senders too? However,
 this adds another level of complexity (a pre- and a passed- gray list,
 sometimes referred to as a dual key). If this proved to be a good method, a
 global whitelist service based on the post-key (simply IP address), sort of
 like RBLSs but RWLs, could be implemented. I don't know if anyone's pursued
 such a thing or not. Seems feasible to me though.
 You are right, but server pools are well known (gmail, yahoo, msn and others)
 and could be easily discovered and included in a whitelist.

Yes, but they change, so you'd need some sort of maintenance procedure to
keep them up to date. It's a slow moving target, but far from being fixed.
Adding a manual maintenance burden is bad. If it were automated though,
that'd be ok.

 A spammer tends to use only an IP address or few ip addresses, so
 using a graylist
 method with single ip addresses could improve security.

How would it improve security? Needs explanation.


-- 
-Eric 'shubes'
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylite and whitelist problems

2008-09-07 Thread Davide D'AMICO
2008/9/7 Eric Shubert [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Davide D'AMICO wrote:
 2008/9/7 Eric Shubert [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 I think I can field this one. ;)

 Davide D'AMICO wrote:
 1) Isn't more useful to graylist senders using their ip address rather
 than only its
 email address, like this:
 /var/db/spamdyke/graylist/domain/rcpt/sender/ip_sender ?
 Some large (think yahoo, gmail) mailers use server pools. Retries might be
 sent from a different server, causing a message to be graylisted many times.

 Personally, I think it'd be ok to use IPs for a type of whitelist after the
 IP has passed graylisting. After all, once an IP has passed for one
 domain/sender, wouldn't it pass for all other domain/senders too? However,
 this adds another level of complexity (a pre- and a passed- gray list,
 sometimes referred to as a dual key). If this proved to be a good method, a
 global whitelist service based on the post-key (simply IP address), sort of
 like RBLSs but RWLs, could be implemented. I don't know if anyone's pursued
 such a thing or not. Seems feasible to me though.
 You are right, but server pools are well known (gmail, yahoo, msn and others)
 and could be easily discovered and included in a whitelist.

 Yes, but they change, so you'd need some sort of maintenance procedure to
 keep them up to date. It's a slow moving target, but far from being fixed.
 Adding a manual maintenance burden is bad. If it were automated though,
 that'd be ok.

Graylist uses a timeout (min/max) to reset/delete graylist files, so
there is no need to use manual maintenance.

Davide
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] Plesk + Spamdyke Control Panel

2008-09-07 Thread nightduke
It's possible to translate this control panel to english and to spanish.

Nightduke


2008/9/7 Stefan Pausch [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 I am not sure, if this has been mentioned in this list before:

 There is a (in my oppinion superb) spamdyke control panel (for Plesk)
 available. I am not sure, if this list supports file attachments: I added a
 screenshot of the panel to this email.

 The Control Panel and the following URls are in german ( well i am not sure
 if the spamdyke control panel support multilanguage - but i guess it isn't
 hard to translate)

 Download panel from (you need to register) http://www.huschi.net/
 Forum thread discussion that panel (german):
 http://serversupportforum.de/forum/plesk/26655-plesk-spamdyke-control-panel.
 html
 Howto installing Spamdyke (and the panel) (german) :
 http://www.huschi.net/25_330_de-plesk-qmail-greylisting-mit-spamdyke.html

 If you don't speak english, but want to install that panel / need help
 translating, just let me know.

 Maybe this helps somebody :)

 --Stefan

 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] Plesk + Spamdyke Control Panel

2008-09-07 Thread Stefan Pausch
I mistyped the Download url in my entry post. The correct page for
downloading the SCP is: http://www.haggybear.de

 It's possible to translate this control panel to english and to
 spanish.

Is this a question, or a statement?

--Stefan


 -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
 Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:spamdyke-users-
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von nightduke
 Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. September 2008 18:50
 An: spamdyke users
 Betreff: Re: [spamdyke-users] Plesk + Spamdyke Control Panel
 
 It's possible to translate this control panel to english and to
 spanish.
 
 Nightduke
 
 
 2008/9/7 Stefan Pausch [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  I am not sure, if this has been mentioned in this list before:
 
  There is a (in my oppinion superb) spamdyke control panel (for Plesk)
  available. I am not sure, if this list supports file attachments: I
 added a
  screenshot of the panel to this email.
 
  The Control Panel and the following URls are in german ( well i am
 not sure
  if the spamdyke control panel support multilanguage - but i guess it
 isn't
  hard to translate)
 
  Download panel from (you need to register) http://www.huschi.net/
  Forum thread discussion that panel (german):
  http://serversupportforum.de/forum/plesk/26655-plesk-spamdyke-
 control-panel.
  html
  Howto installing Spamdyke (and the panel) (german) :
  http://www.huschi.net/25_330_de-plesk-qmail-greylisting-mit-
 spamdyke.html
 
  If you don't speak english, but want to install that panel / need
 help
  translating, just let me know.
 
  Maybe this helps somebody :)
 
  --Stefan
 
  ___
  spamdyke-users mailing list
  spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
  http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
 
 
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] Plesk + Spamdyke Control Panel

2008-09-07 Thread Stefan Pausch
 It's possible to translate this control panel to english and to
 spanish.

SCP comes with german (lang/de.inc.php) and englisch (lang/en.inc.php)
language files. In config.inc.php the default language (define(LANG,
de);) can be switched.

The installation.txt is in english. (didn't notice that, until i looked fort
he language type ^^)

Guess it is no problem at all to translate it to spanish. Maybe you should
send haggybear a copy of the language file :)

--Stefan

___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] strange error at log

2008-09-07 Thread Sam Clippinger
DENIED_OTHER means that the message was rejected by something other than 
spamdyke.  For example, when qmail rejects a message with Sorry, that 
domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts, spamdyke will log it as 
DENIED_OTHER.

FYI, all of spamdyke's log messages are documented in the README file:
http://www.spamdyke.org/documentation/README.html#LOG

-- Sam Clippinger

nightduke wrote:
 Sep  7 06:26:28 server1 spamdyke[9898]: DENIED_OTHER from:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] origin_ip: 122.99.61.133
 origin_rdns: host-133.61-99-122.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw auth: (unknown)

 What's denied_other?
 Can anyone explain to me?

 Thanks

 Nightduke
 ___
 spamdyke-users mailing list
 spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
 http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
   
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users


Re: [spamdyke-users] Graylite and whitelist problems

2008-09-07 Thread Sam Clippinger
Building an IP whitelist based on the graylist filter would be 
problematic.  As you noted, server pools wouldn't be handled correctly.  
Proxies and NAT firewalls would also be an issue -- imagine one server 
behind a proxy passes the graylist, so the proxy is added to the 
whitelist.  Then another server behind the proxy starts sending spam.  
The whitelist would let it all through.  Also, an automatic whitelist 
like this would be easy to defeat if a spammer just sent a message to a 
known-good address before starting a spam run.

Regarding the second question about the IP whitelist allowing all mail 
from the whitelisted server, Davide is correct.  Once an IP has been 
whitelisted, spamdyke will allow it to send anything -- it bypasses all 
filters and authentication is not required.  That's why whitelisting IP 
addresses should only be done sparingly, when the remote server can be 
trusted.  Caveat: In version 4.0, the smtp-auth-level and 
filter-level options are not affected by whitelists.

-- Sam Clippinger

Eric Shubert wrote:
 I think I can field this one. ;)

 Davide D'AMICO wrote:
   
 Hi,
 I'm using spamdyke and I like it a lot.
 I encountered two problems:
 1) Isn't more useful to graylist senders using their ip address rather
 than only its
 email address, like this:
 /var/db/spamdyke/graylist/domain/rcpt/sender/ip_sender ?
 

 Some large (think yahoo, gmail) mailers use server pools. Retries might be
 sent from a different server, causing a message to be graylisted many times.

 Personally, I think it'd be ok to use IPs for a type of whitelist after the
 IP has passed graylisting. After all, once an IP has passed for one
 domain/sender, wouldn't it pass for all other domain/senders too? However,
 this adds another level of complexity (a pre- and a passed- gray list,
 sometimes referred to as a dual key). If this proved to be a good method, a
 global whitelist service based on the post-key (simply IP address), sort of
 like RBLSs but RWLs, could be implemented. I don't know if anyone's pursued
 such a thing or not. Seems feasible to me though.

   
 2) if I include an ip address in a whitelist, I become a relay for
 that ip address because
 that ip address bypass ALL other filters?
 

 No, because authentication is still required for non-local domains. Spamdyke
 filters are only bypassed if/when the sender authenticates.

   
 Thanks in advance,
 Davide
 

   
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users