Re: [xmail] Outbind
Hello... I have recently performed a new installation of xMail 1.27 onto a Windows Server 2008 R2 X64 configuration. The Server has two IPs 64.XXX.XXX.230 and 64.XXX.XXX.229. I am trying to force xMail to use 64.XXX.XXX.230 for all outbound eMails. I've looked an OLD server.tab that I have PLUS I look at the docs several times at: www.xmailserver.org/Readme.html#server_tab and www.xmailserver.org/Readme.html#smtp_gateway_configuration. After which I added a line in sever.tab like: SmtpGwConfig OutBind=64.74.149.230 It appears to NOT be working when I perform a telent test and review the received eMail -- its still coming from the default IP 64.XXX.XXX.229.. Do I need to add some privledge to the service enable this or am I missing something else? The service is running with LSA! Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Hal Dell ___ xmail mailing list xmail@xmailserver.org http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail
Re: [xmail] Web Mail
If you want a commerical Windows based product with MS Exchange like features -- I use SmarterMail especially if you are an ISP/ASP. It Integrates with xMail via standard POP/SMTP. Thans, Hal... _ From: xmail-boun...@xmailserver.org [mailto:xmail-boun...@xmailserver.org] On Behalf Of Edmonds, J.B. Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:32 AM To: xmail@xmailserver.org Subject: [xmail] Web Mail Probably asked 100 times but I need a decent webmail product to use with xmail on Windows. Does SquirrelMail work? What other suggestions are there? Basic read, send mail and address book jb ___ xmail mailing list xmail@xmailserver.org http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail
[xmail] Re: 1.26-pre01
Hal wrote --- Is the NoAuth option is designed to fix the Postini lockdown issue? Thefore is the syntax: SmtpConfig-ip,porttab NoAuth. And this option looks at IPPROP for the whitelist? Sorry. Jumped the gun here. Yes, this should solve my lockdown issue... And you made this an IPPROP and it appears I use this option instead of the whitelist? Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. PO Box 22 Willow Grove, PA 19090 +1-215-830-0662 (phone) +1-215-913-6894 (cell) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear Davide - On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Hal Dell wrote: Dear Clement Francis / Davide - First at all xmail doc for smtp.ipprop.tab syntax says : Address selection mask are formed by an IP address (network) plus the number of valid bits inside the network mask [...snip...] 96.227.65.4/32WhiteList=1 Yes, I was wondering if the parser would just assume that without the slash it figure out that was were referencing a single node. Well, I made the above change and it still does NOT work; in other words I still get the 551 Server use forbidden error message. On Thursday, April 24, 2008, Davide wrote: OK, I lied to you. Actually, I forgot about mailauth no being clear by ipprop. Note for self: Add an smtp.iprop.tab option to release the MailAuth constraint. Any way you can provide a solution sooner then later that I can test? Since, I moved my xMail to a new IP the domains on this server had been SPAM free since the MX records the oustide world see points to Postini and the old xMail server running on the old IP no longer accepts eMail my for domain. This new IP was never used for anything previously. However, the SPAMers found the new xMail Server -- it only took about 1.5 weeks. Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear David Lord - I've still not worked out if you want mail coming in via postini to be allowed to be relayed or if postini is just an external filter fo scanning some of your incoming mail. If the latter, I can't see why it should need to be treated different to any other incoming email. However you've mentioned putting an entry for postini in smtprelay.tab which would indicate that you intend it is allowed to be relayed. I can't see how that can be done securely though without authentication. ... you are correct that the eMail from Postini plus outbound eMail from clients are Relay'd on Port 25. There is no problem so far as I know in using port 25, but in my case that port is blocked for outgoing by the ISPs except via their particular gateways. Can you arrange for your clients to use authentication on port 25? You need to keep in mind that I am the ISP for my customers and that both eMail Client and MTA Relay (Postini in this case) uses Port 25. What we have been talking about (in this thread -- look at previous posts ) is using the server.tab option SmtpConfig-ip,port with MailAuth. The net effect of this command is for force authorization on all gateway'd eMail period. The issue is that we need some kind of exception for relay'd eMail -- in this case coming from Postini. Presently, any options specified in smtp.ipprop.tab and smtprelay.tab are ignored for all incoming eMail when using the above ip and port combo with SmtpConfig. What we are waiting on from Davide is some new option to allow an override of the present behavior of SmtpConfig with MailAuth. Thefore, one has no choice but to lock the relay function to only accept eMails from the upstream relay MTA; in this case Postini IPs. This is easily doable on Many of the MTAs that I've come across in the past like Microsoft Exchange; and RFC 4409 already proposed this concept. If you can be sure only your own customers will attempt to relay via postini you can just add that ip block to smtprelay.tab without specifying authentication, however I'd not trust it as being secure without knowin a lot more as to how the service works. Postini is an MTA which forwards eMail to my xMail Server only and does not provide the function to allow the relay outside of the domains available on the xMail Server -- if it did it would be an open relay! All, outbound relay'd eMail for clients have to go thru my xMail and the Customers use Port 25 or the submission Port 587. We can't use a Firewall to block in bound access because clients are located any place -- and clients are mobile with laptops and pdas. The Postini Config works like this: DNS Name -- MX records with public IPs of Postini MTA -- [ Postini In-Bound MTAs -- Postini Scanner Engines -- Postini Out-Bound MTAs pre-programmed to the IP of xMail MTA via Port 25 ] -- xMail MTA. Client config looks like: DNS Name -- A Record with public IP -- xMail MTA on Port 25 or 587 -- to Internal domains or relay'd Out-Bound for external domains. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Deal Clement Francis - It was just a joke, because your Postini presentation looked like a 'promotional' mail, so take it like a joke :) Sorry if I offended you, it was not wanted. I appreciate your comment. Normally, I would jest too... However, you have to understand this is a huge issue for my customers and a lot of my customers are at risk of switching out because of the the stupid SPAMers. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear Francis - Is this mailing list a marketing place ? :) If so, Davide, it's time to get some money from google to make xmail 'postini' compliant :) (Or should I say : to help google make postini 'auth' standard compliant to be able to be compatible with xmail and other 'standard' smtp servers LOL) IMMO Since, some folks have not heard about Postini's SPAM + Anti-Spy + Any-AV all in one Software As A Service Solution -- I thought giving folks a short description about the solution would be beneficial. With this kind of interest in Postini (+40K companies) and a less then 0.1% false positive rate This solution is a serious alternative as Not everyone has your combination of skills, time, server resources to roll their own solution. I personally, belive, that blending open source and commerical solutions provide a signficant upside. And this is just ONE way not the ONLY way to solve a technology problem. I am offended buy your comment sir -- even in fun - to be clear my original eMail did NOT solicit any business from the list. Your comments take away from the urgency of the issue at hand and the fact that my customers are getting buried by SPAM! Beside, their are plenty of commercial solutions for eMail Filtering and compliance like SonicWALL's eMail Security Appliance which also would require this same configuration. /IMMO It is my understanding that Mail-Auth was designed be to implement a submission port as defined by RFC 4409? In fact, RFC 4409 states: 3.2. Message Rejection and Bouncing. MTAs and MSAs MAY implement message rejection rules that rely in part on whether the message is a submission or a relay. For example, some sites might configure their MTAs to reject all RCPT commands for messages that do not reference local users, and configure their MSA to reject all message submissions that do not come from authorized users, with authorization based either on authenticated identity or the submitting endpoint being within a protected IP environment. Beyond Mr. Francis prior insights, I'm interested to here additional comments about how to xMail should respond to Relay'd eMail when using Mail-Auth. Finally, in the document we should clarify how something like 96.227.65.4 is interpreted when use in conjunction with slash notation? Is this equal really to 96.227.65.4/32? I think the docs should be updated to say one way or the other. I hope you can see how one my interpret the documentation. Davide can you please tells how this works exactly? Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear David Lord - I've still not worked out if you want mail coming in via postini to be allowed to be relayed or if postini is just an external filter for scanning some of your incoming mail. If the latter, I can't see why it should need to be treated different to any other incoming email. However you've mentioned putting an entry for postini in smtprelay.tab which would indicate that you intend it is allowed to be relayed. I can't see how that can be done securely though without authentication. Please understand that I support eMail for about over 300 Domains and about 450 eMailboxes so changing ports would be large task. Further, you are correct that the eMail from Postini plus outbound eMail from clients are Relay'd on Port 25. The problem is 1) the SPAMers are ignoring the MX records and using a private look-aside IP Address Database(s) which allows the SPAMers to bypass Postini by directly making a connection to the xMail Server on it's IP Address on Port 25; and 2) the SPAMers are constantly scanning IPs around the world for new or moved eMail servers; therfore they will eventually any hidden open Server within weeks -- I'm not just talking about an Issuse with SMTP -- this includes ALL of the protocols including the more common FTP, SQL, SMB, etc. Thefore, one has no choice but to lock the relay function to only accept eMails from the upstream relay MTA; in this case Postini IPs. This is easily doable on Many of the MTAs that I've come across in the past like Microsoft Exchange; and RFC 4409 already proposed this concept. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Hello... For those of you who don't know Postini -- the company was founded in 1999 in California as a eMail Communication Security and Compliance company. By May 2004 it was relaying 1.4B eMail annually for over 3300 companies. Postini was recently purchased by Google for just over 1/2 Billon Dollars. In one package you get SPAM Filtering, Anti-Spyware and Anti-Virus checking plus a web site to to manage white/black lists and quarantined eMail on a per eMailbox basis. Today, Postini is processing eMails for 40,000 Business with 10M eMailboxes which means 1B eMail messages per day flow thru their systems of which 85% of these messages are blocked as unsolicited or malicious. Of the remaining, about 10% are quarantined and the balance are delivered as clean eMail. For example over the last 30 Days we received 55,000 messages and 6.5% were delivered as clean. We now have a reseller agreement in place and are now signing up our ISP customers for this service. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Thanks to every for their help. I'll be waiting on the fix to solve the Postini problem. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Guys... Thanks for all of you input... Of course Postini is just another solution. It is just unfortunate that I'm the the first one to try to make Postini work with xMail here in April 2008. I guess I have to wait on Davide to solve this problem. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear Davide - OK, I lied to you. Actually, I forgot about mailauth no being clear by ipprop. Note for self: Add an smtp.iprop.tab option to release the MailAuth constraint. Thanks for getting to the bottom of this. Any chance I could get a test binary for Windows that I could use to make sure everything works. Otherwise, it could be a long wait for my customers who need spam filtering from postini yesterday because they are getting burried in SPAM. Any assistance would be appriectiated before the next release. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
xmail CustMapList (I use spamhaust.org very good) Davide glst for xmail (excluding auth users with eax setting in smtp-in filter) some av filter for xmail I used spamhaus.org at my Firewall and filter out 8-10K eMails per hour during the day and the SPAM keeps coming. Greylisting is not working as well as it used to... Verizon, Hotmail and Yahoo Mail seem to not re-send correctly when Graylisting is ON. I previously posted about this Finally, my Firewall eliminates all of if not most of the Virus and such... The right solution is to simply get xMail to work with Postini. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear Francis - Effectively, it seems the MailAuth feature does not take into account the 'WhiteList' parameter in the smtp.ipprop.tab file. But should it be the case as the smtp.ipprop.tab Whitelist is supposed to be used to change ip checks ? Davide is the one who suggested the smtp.ipprop.tab option to me as I did not really use this tab before. I originally tried adding entries to smtprelay.tab which did not work either. For now, Hal, I think you could use your firewall to block any 'external' attempts to go to you Postini dedicated xmail server ip and ports ;) The problem is that I use xMail as part of my ISP service therefore customers are using xMail as their outbound eMail MTA on Port 25 from all over the place on the net therefore it is not possible to block the port. Even if I could use my firewall to block access; Postini does not have a feature to change the forwarding IP Port for the Relay nor any kind of Authorization that I know of. IMOO another smtp.ipprop.tab parameter like MailAuth=0 should be created (to not change/mix 'ip checks' rules) IMOO I think of this as a Relay function so I think the smtprelay.tab is the place for the information. The docs define the purpose is to allow hosts or networks to use the server as relay. Agains the docs say using SmtpConfig-IP makes authentication require[d] to send mail to the server. Please note that by setting this value everything requires authentication, even for sending to local domains, and this is probably not what you want. However, I'm not sure why SmtpConfig-IP is locked down so hard? Maybe, another way to think about this is that a parameter needs to be added to SmtpConfig-IP to determine if the smtp.ipprop.tab or smtprelay.tab should override the MailAuth. For example: SmtpConfig-64.74.149.27,25MailAuth ipprop SmtpConfig-64.74.149.27,25MailAuth relay Any further suggestions Francis? I just can't believe that as popular as Postini has become that I'm the first one trying to get xMail integrate with it! Anyone done this before? Davide what is our next step? I could really use a patched version of xMail to test. Thanks, Hal Dell ePodWorks.net, Inc. Managing Partner - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear Clement Francis / Davide - First at all xmail doc for smtp.ipprop.tab syntax says : Address selection mask are formed by an IP address (network) plus the number of valid bits inside the network mask [...snip...] 96.227.65.4/32 WhiteList=1 Yes, I was wondering if the parser would just assume that without the slash it figure out that was were referencing a single node. Well, I made the above change and it still does NOT work; in other words I still get the 551 Server use forbidden error message. Also, tested the xMail server against my local IP (10.0.0.25), as I have a VPN connection to the eMail server as well and that did NOT work as well. And the answer is YES, when I test the 96. address I dropped the VPN tunnel before testing. I also thought of another idea to determine if xMail returns the correct data I performed the following command: ctrlclnt -s XX.XX.XX.XX -n -u Y -p Z cfgfileget smtp.ipprop.tab The command line program returned: 10.0.0.0/16 WhiteList=1 64.18.0.0/20 WhiteList=1 96.227.65.4/32WhiteList=1 Unless you have any further suggestions... What is our next step? Thanks, Hal Dell ePodWorks.net, Inc. Managing Partner - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear Davide - On 4/18/2008 3:24PM ET you responded to my eMail about how to lockdown xMail for use with Postini or any private mail Relay. My OS is Windows 2003 Enterprise R2 Server SP2 running xMail 1.25. Please note that I do have two instances of xMail running on the same server. As far as I can this configuration works just fine. This configuration was perfected with information gleaned from several sources including the kind folks on this list. This xMail server in question is the second instance. The reason I have two xMail servers is so that the first one serves my existing eMailboxes and the second xMail Server will only accept eMail relayed to it from Postini. The xMail servers are behind a Firewall in a DMZ using public IPs. Your suggestion was: Add the IP of the Postini box to SMTP.IPPROP.TAB (lowercase, you know), with a WhiteList=1 property. I continue to get the 551 Server use forbidden from Postini which I assumed was still being sent back from xMail. To prove the source of the issue (Postini vs. xMail) I manually telnet-ed to the xMail server and typed HELO relay.example.org then MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] from my home office network which is NATed to a single public IP. As you will see from the test below that I included my home office public IP network address which is 96. address in the config files (to stand in for the Postini infrastructure). So I reviewed my following configs for errors and did not find any -- so here are the details -- server.tab more config SmtpConfig-64.74.149.27,25MailAuth SmtpConfig-64.74.149.27,8291 MailAuth more config smtp.ipprop.tab 10.0.0.0/24 WhiteList=1 64.18.0.0/20 WhiteList=1 96.227.65.4 WhiteList=1 blank line I also tried smtprelay.tab with the following just because I thought I should try: 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 64.18.0.0 255.255.240.0 96.227.65.4 255.255.255.255 blank line Finally, I went back into the server config and commented out the SmtpConfig- lines in the server.tab and xMail responded with 250 OK instead of the 551 Server use forbidden. Without the SmtpConfig I then sent an eMail from Hotmail to my test domain and Postini was able to delivery an eMail fine! Can you spot my config issue? Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. =WITH SmtpConfig 220 smtp-03.phl1.epodworks.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] [XMail 1.25 ESMTP Server] service ready; Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:34:39 -0400 HELO relay.example.org 250 smtp-03.phl1.epodworks.net MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 551 Server use forbidden quit 221 [XMail 1.25 ESMTP Server] service closing transmission channel =WITHOUT SmtpConfig 220 smtp-03.phl1.epodworks.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] [XMail 1.25 ESMTP Server] service ready; Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:38:30 -0400 HELO relay.example.org 250 smtp-03.phl1.epodworks.net MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 OK quit 221 [XMail 1.25 ESMTP Server] service closing transmission channel =SUCCESSFUL MAIL DELIVERY WITHOUT SmtpConfig= (X@ was replaced for real eMail address because this eMail will be publicly archived) Received: from psmtp.com ([64.18.0.75]:45028) by smtp-03.phl1.epodworks.net ([64.74.149.27]:25) with [XMail 1.25 ESMTP Server] id S13 for [EMAIL PROTECTED] from [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:49:09 -0400 Received: from source ([65.54.246.139]) by exprod5mx216.postini.com ([64.18.4.10]) with SMTP; Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:49:09 PDT Received: from BAY124-W44 ([207.46.11.207]) by bay0-omc2-s3.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:49:08 -0700 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=_1731ae70-8835-4c66-91d6-b2a54a21882f_ X-Originating-IP: [96.227.65.4] From: Hal Dell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Postini test day 2008-04-21-11-48 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:49:08 -0400 Importance: Normal MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Apr 2008 03:49:08.0976 (UTC) FILETIME=[D1C1FF00:01C8A42B] X-pstn-neptune: 0/0/0.00/0 X-pstn-levels: (S:37.90482/99.9 CV:99. R:95.9108 P:95.9108 M:97.0282 C:98.6951 ) X-pstn-settings: 5 (2.:2.) s cv gt3 gt2 gt1 r p m c X-pstn-addresses: from [EMAIL PROTECTED] [15/1] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Hello All... I have an external eMail Server that accepts inbound eMail then relays all of the eMail to my internal xMail Server. eMail Clients wanting to send eMails out will connect to the xMail Server. I want to force any SMTP connections to xMail to require Authentication and the only allow relaying of eMail by the IPs in the smtprelay.tab. The IP Address of the external eMail Server would be listed in the smtprelay.tab so that xMail would accept eMail from the external eMail server without the need for authentication. So I added the following to the server.tab: SmtpConfig-64.74.149.27,25MailAuth SmtpConfig-64.74.149.27,8291 MailAuth However, if you telnet to the above IP and manually perform the protocol exchange then xMail Server accepts the eMail for the local domain epodworks.net. I was under the impression that if I add the above SmtpConfig it would force authentication on ALL inbound SMTP traffic. HELO relay.example.org MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED] DATA From: Bob Example [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Hal [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:02:43 -0500 Subject: Test message Hello Alice. This is a test message with 5 headers and 4 lines in the body. Your friend, Bob .. QUIT Any thoughts would be helpful Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail
Dear Davide - As you can see from my previous messages I was unable to lockdown the xMail Server based upon the config below. I did discover that SmtpConfig now seems to work after an upgrade from 1.24 to 1.25. Now , when I attempt to connect directly and type Mail from:[EMAIL PROTECTED] without prior authentication I get the error message 551 Server use forbidden. Which I guess is what should be expected. When I manually perform an AUTH LOGIN and then type Mail from:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I get the message 250 OK. The reason I'm doing all of this is to pass all my eMail thru Postini. I really would appreciate your help on this. However, Postini is going to only work if I can lock out the spammers from connecting to my eMail server directly as they ignore the MX records. As you know Postini acts as an eMail Relay as follows: Postini MTA In --- SPAM Engine -- Postini SMTP Out -- My xMail MTA Target eMail Address is [EMAIL PROTECTED] with MX pointing to Postini Postini Address Space: 64.18.0.0 / 255.255.240.0 My xMail MTA: 64.74.149.27 Now keep in mind that I use xMail in an ISP scenario and as such that I don't know the IPs of the eMail clients connecting to the xMail Server from outside thus I need to allow eMail clients to relay. Of course all clients are required authenticate. I assume I can't use SMTP.IPMAP.TAB because of this. Therefore, it seemed to me that by adding the Postini Address space to the SMTPRELAY.TAB I was hoping it would override the need for authentication. Unfortunately, Postini does provide support for authentication as it is simply a Relay. I guess the questions is why is the content of the SMTPRELAY.TAB override the need for SMTP Authentication? Or is their something that I need to do to make this work? The line in the realy file is: 64.18.0.0 255.255.240.0 Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. Hal Dell Wrote on: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:27 PM Hello All... I have an external eMail Server that accepts inbound eMail then relays all of the eMail to my internal xMail Server. eMail Clients wanting to send eMails out will connect to the xMail Server. I want to force any SMTP connections to xMail to require Authentication and the only allow relaying of eMail by the IPs in the smtprelay.tab. The IP Address of the external eMail Server would be listed in the smtprelay.tab so that xMail would accept eMail from the external eMail server without the need for authentication. So I added the following to the server.tab: SmtpConfig-64.74.149.27,25MailAuth SmtpConfig-64.74.149.27,8291 MailAuth However, if you telnet to the above IP and manually perform the protocol exchange then xMail Server accepts the eMail for the local domain epodworks.net. I was under the impression that if I add the above SmtpConfig it would force authentication on ALL inbound SMTP traffic. HELO relay.example.org MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED] DATA From: Bob Example [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Hal [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:02:43 -0500 Subject: Test message Hello Alice. This is a test message with 5 headers and 4 lines in the body. Your friend, Bob ... QUIT - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Lockdown xMail SMTP
Hello al... How do I configure xMail so that it is locked down -- such that xMail will only accept eMail from authenticated eMail clients. In my case I have an upstream MTA that excepts mail from the outside world -- thus the IP address of this MTA is in the SMTPRELAY.TAB file. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Help with Postini
Can someone help me on this some more? On Thursday, February 21, 2008 2:29 PM, Davide wrote: check smtp.ipmap.tab: http://www.xmailserver.org/Readme.html#smtp_ipmap_tab If I add IP addresses of Postini's SMTP Relay Agents to the above SMTP.IPMAP.TAB file and deny all others Then won't eMails from normal eMail clients be also blocked as well? How do I lock down xMail such that only folks authenticating will allow xMail to accept in bound eMails... Then, I guess I would add P addresses of Postini's SMTP to the SMTPRELAY.TAB file instead of the SMTP.IPMAP.TAB? Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Help with Postini
Dear Rob Arends - Thanks for all of that... I worked all that out... As you said I was very close... However, I could not find the same specific article you found... The last hurtle is how to lockdown xMail to only accept relay mail from Postini while allowing authenticated eMail from anyone. See http://www.mail-archive.com/xmail@xmailserver.org/msg16017.html. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Help with Postini
Dear Don Drake - It's definitely possible to run multiple XMail servers on a single machine, I have a bunch running. You will need separate installation directories and you'll have to specify IP's on startup for each instance as well as setting XMAIL_PID_DIR for clean shutdowns. Sure, I get all of the above requirements... Since, you mentioned, XMAIL_PID_DIR that means you are running on *nix as XMAIL_PID_DIR is NOT a valid environment variable for Windows. Right? Let's not loose site of the fact that I have a problem looking for a solution in that It seems to me that other folks have commented on this same underlying issue.. We need to lock a domain to accept eMail from a specific upstream MTA. In this case, using Postini does not help, because the SPAMers simply continue to direct connect to xMail and bypass Postini. So an internal xMail solution could be an smtp.ipmap.tab filed that could be added to the domain level. Check this related url http://www.mail-archive.com/xmail@xmailserver.org/msg08057.html. Without the above fix, the question becomes how to finesse running multiple xMail Server binaries in my environment which is Windows? Presently on Windows, when xMail.exe running as a service the OS goes out to the registry at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Xmail for the basic service parameters to manage the process thru Services MMC... It's fairly easy to poke the Registry to create another service with a name like: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Xmail2. I believe the possiblity of doing this on Windows, is going to come down to if xMail.exe is hard coded to go out to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\GNU\Xmail to look for MAIL_ROOT and MAIL_CMD_LINE for the root folder and startup parameters respectively as a replacement for envrionment vairables when running as a service. The docs (http://xmailserver.org/Readme.html#nt_win2k_xp) talk about this registry stuff from a simple installation point of view... Does anyone understand how GNU or maybe it's xMail maps the environment variables to the GNU registry entry? Is it simply looking up the file name of the exe or is the registry path simply hard coded? OR what would happen if I blank the MAIL_ROOT and MAIL_CMD_LINE can I add the parameters directly on to the end of the ImagePath Regitry entry in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Xmail? Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Help with Postini
Hello.. All... I have a shared xMail eMail Server with several dozen domains... A couple of the domains filter the eMail thru postini first... Thus we get... Postini MTA In --- SPAM Engine -- Postini SMTP Out -- My xMail MTA The question is can I lock a specific domain do only except eMails from one of the postini outbound smtp servers without creating some kind of filter? The reason is the spammers somtime ignore the MX and connect Directly to the xMail Server. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: new Twist on POP3 Tail Issue?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Davide Libenzi Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 3:30 PM To: xmail@xmailserver.org Subject: [xmail] Re: new Twist on POP3 Tail Issue? [snip...] Save it, where? I have it on disk, I can sent it to you privately if you like. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. PO Box 22 Willow Grove, PA 19090 +1-215-830-0662 (phone) +1-215-913-6894 (cell) +1-866-549-4652 (fax) Need Support send eMail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: new Twist on POP3 Tail Issue?
Hello all... Some time ago, in July of 2006, Davide wrote the xbmf post-data filter to filter out eMail messages with the POP3 Tail Issue plus other related issues. One place you can see Davide's posting about this is: http://xmailforum.homelinux.net/index.php?s=2579b675e310d8ffdc219b691909d79 ashowtopic=3269 http://xmailforum.homelinux.net/index.php?s=2579b675e310d8ffdc219b691909d79a showtopic=3269. As we know this issue appeared be the lack of a proper termination sequence or tail on a particular POP3 email message. RFC 1939 (the POP3 protocol specification) dictates that all email messages must end with a pair of CR+LF characters. The problem started small and took only a couple months to a serious pain in the you know what. In the above case, both Eudora and Outlook 2003 eMail clients would simply hang. Well, all of a sudden I am getting eMail messages that will kill the POP3 download in progress for both Eudora and Outlook 2003. Both of these programs failed previous and my guess is that they both use the same APIs. As far as I know Microsoft never tracked down the source of the issue in Outlook 2003. I have saved one exemplar that I believe is causing the issue. I need some to help to figure this out. Anyone knows something about MIME formatted messages? Once we figure out the cause then maybe we can update xbmf to test for this case as well. Thanks in advance for any assistance. Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. PO Box 22 Willow Grove, PA 19090 +1-215-830-0662 (phone) +1-215-913-6894 (cell) +1-866-549-4652 (fax) Need Support send eMail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Bounced eMail messags
Hello All... Recently a SPAMer started sending eMails to the server using a dictionary for eMail addresses like [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc. Then the eMail Servers trys to send an eMail message back to the sender indicating the eMail was NOT delivered because of a bad eMail address. So I've set NoSenderBounce to 1. By changing this setting will this stop this behavior? Next, I still need SenderBounce enabled for certain eMail accounts. I was wondering why we don't push down a lot of these configuration options to the domain level like SmarterMail does? If a lot of folks using xMail are ISP / ASP then this would make sense to have management control at the domain level. I don't know if you guys have seen this but the SPAMers are now using your eMail Server, if eMail bounce back Messages are on, to effectively SYN Flood someone. The way this works is they get hold of some domain then point that domain's A to an IP that does NOT have an eMail Server associated with it. Typically, these domains don't have MX records. Then, they send a slow drip of eMails to the same domain, the effect is the eMail Server tries to deliver the bounce back to the sender over and over again. Each time the bounce back is attempted an TCP connection is attempted and of course a SYN is generated first. Now, imagine, that you have several 100 eMails in the message queue, all the time, all trying to connect to that same IP at various intervals based upon the time they were received. And now you get a SYN Flood. How do we solve this? Can you simply ONLY send eMails to domains that have MX records? I know this Probally violates and RFC, however, we else can we do until someone decides to fix the larger SPAM issue. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner Willow Grove, PA - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Bounced eMail messags
Wolfy Wrote @ Wednesday, October 03, 2007 10:37 AM Last weekend I had an example of this happen to one of my backup mail servers. When I noticed the problem there were 27,000 NDR type messages it was trying to deliver. Mostly all were sent to random [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the mail server was diligently trying sending NDR's to every single one of them - most likely to faked or spoofed addresses. I could actually sit and watch more junk flooding in, they appeared to be coming from many compromised hosts so blocking the IP's didn't really help. So it would be very useful if Xmail at least had an option so that it does not send all the bounced email messages. I realise this may not conform to the RFC's and I realise that not many people may use it, but it would still be a very helpful if the mail-admin found that NDR messages were getting out of hand. One or two legitimate senders may not know that their mail was not delivered, but when compared to the type of flood described here its a small price to pay Yes, you are absolutely correct -- this is becoming a very SERIOUS problem. All of this started with us back in July. The problem comes and goes. [NB: NDR = ?] However, the issue now is I'm getting complaints from the folks getting the bounce backs because a lot of time the from line in header is forged and points to a real eMail Address. I'm also getting complaints from the targets of the effective SYN Flooding. What I started to do is test this work around idea -- create a bogon user for said domain and set the alias to a '*' then set the disk quota 1K. So this first captures all of the bogus eMails for a domain and once the quota reaches 1K an error should be sent back indicating the mailbox is full. The problem is that xMail still generates a bounce back eMail message ! Now, I'm not an SMTP RFC expert, however, if xMail would simply reply 452 Requested action not taken: insufficient system storage instead of accepting the eMail we would be fine. Let the sender deal with the error. If it was a legitimate sender the sender's MTA would send the bounce back to their user instead of us. As I understand it, if the sending MTA gets a 4XX Reply code, the response code is considered to be a transient Error and the sender's MTA is responsible for the queuing of the eMail and trying again. The middle digit in the 452 error code, in other words -- 5 indicates, the problem is with the destination MTA. If sure someone on the list knows this RFC stuff better and can offer another solution that is more RFC compatible. It think we need to get this NDR problem solved quick... Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Bounced eMail messags
Francis Wrote @ Wednesday, October 03, 2007 10:37 AM Use glst (greylisting) :) Allmost 99% of these bad connexions will be elliminated, as 99% will = never retry. And as glst will first response with a 4xx code, no NDR until second = attempt connexion accepted by glst. That is a good idea... However, when I tried Greylisting before with a different eMail Server and I found some MTAs like Hotmail.com did not re-queue the eMail for a second attempt like they should -- of course I did not try this idea with xMail. I am C challenged -- anyone have Windows 2K3 binaries that I can try out? The only downside with this idea is that we still have to deliver the NDR at some point. I still think it is best we let the sending MTA handle the bad eMail destinations. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. Willow Grove, PA - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Bounced eMail messags
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Hal Dell wrote: Recently a SPAMer started sending eMails to the server using a dictionary for eMail addresses like [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc. Then the eMail Servers trys to send an eMail message back to the sender indicating the eMail was NOT delivered because of a bad eMail address. On Wednesday, October 03, 2007 2:28 PM Davide wrote: Why doesn't your server reject bad addresses at SMTP level?? In *my* server, that stuf never even souch the spool. Actually, 99+% of SPAM gets puked on at RBL level. That's not been my experience. We have RBL (Zen) turned on at the head of our network and we dump like some 4000 eMails per hour during the day before they even get to xMail. The eMails that I am talking about get thru that filter check. I'm sorry, I should have said that we are running xMail V1.24 at present -- so I guess I'm saying that our xMail Server V1.24 does NOT reject the bad destination eMails in the MTA session -- they seem to get queued for later retry delivery attempts and eventually an NDR is sent. Is their a setting already built in V1.24 to stop this behavior? See example eMail below... [EMAIL PROTECTED] is NOT a valid eMail address for that domain ! I also found that when an eMailbox is full; xMail also generates an NDR as well. In both cases is it not better to inform the sending MTA in the MTA session that their is a problem and send a 45x SMTP message reply? Or do you already do this? If so then why to NDR? Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. === Received: from pool-71-185-120-19.phlapa.east.verizon.net ([71.185.120.19]:50645) by smtp.phl1.epodworks.net ([64.74.149.24]:25) with [XMail 1.24 ESMTP Server] id S92C51F for [EMAIL PROTECTED] from [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 15:00:43 -0400 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Sales [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Nikolay Maslov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: rath quarred nagano Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:00:04 + MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600. X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600. Starting from [snip] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Bounced eMail messags
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Hal Dell wrote: I'm sorry, I should have said that we are running xMail V1.24 at present -- so I guess I'm saying that our xMail Server V1.24 does NOT reject the bad destination eMails in the MTA session -- they seem to get queued for later retry delivery attempts and eventually an NDR is sent. Man, that depends on how you set it up. Not on XMail. I have a stock V1.24 out of the box -- only filter installed is xbmf.c. We don't do any thing special If you know of some setting in server.tab or some other .tab file that controls this behavior please let me know. Here is a sample MTA session: 220 smtp.phl1.epodworks.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] [XMail 1. 24 ESMTP Server] service ready; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 15:37:29 -0400 HELO BOGUS.COM 250 smtp.phl1.epodworks.net MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 OK RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 OK DATA 354 Start mail input; end with CRLF.CRLF This Message is sent to a Bogus eMail Address and xMail accepts it. 250 OK S92C79B QUIT 221 [XMail 1.24 ESMTP Server] service closing transmission channel So the eMail was accepted because epodworks.com is a custom domain which is then redirected to epodworks.net -- both domain are on the same xMail Server -- that's the problem! Is their a better way to do this so that epodworks.com, epodwork.com and epodwork.net are aliased so that we generate the 550 Mailbox unavailable? If I try an eMail directly to the real non-custom domain I get this: 220 smtp.phl1.epodworks.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] [XMail 1. 24 ESMTP Server] service ready; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 15:40:53 -0400 HELO BOGUS.COM 250 smtp.phl1.epodworks.net MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 OK RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 550 Mailbox unavailable [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. PO Box 22 Willow Grove, PA 19090 +1-215-830-0662 (phone) +1-215-913-6894 (cell) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Bounced eMail messags
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Davide Libenzi Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 3:54 PM To: xmail@xmailserver.org Subject: [xmail] Re: Bounced eMail messags On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Hal Dell wrote: On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Hal Dell wrote: I'm sorry, I should have said that we are running xMail V1.24 at present -- so I guess I'm saying that our xMail Server V1.24 does NOT reject the bad destination eMails in the MTA session -- they seem to get queued for later retry delivery attempts and eventually an NDR is sent. Man, that depends on how you set it up. Not on XMail. I have a stock V1.24 out of the box -- only filter installed is xbmf.c. We don't do any thing special If you know of some setting in server.tab or some other .tab file that controls this behavior please let me know. Here is a sample MTA session: 220 smtp.phl1.epodworks.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] [XMail 1. 24 ESMTP Server] service ready; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 15:37:29 -0400 HELO BOGUS.COM 250 smtp.phl1.epodworks.net MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 OK RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 OK DATA 354 Start mail input; end with CRLF.CRLF This Message is sent to a Bogus eMail Address and xMail accepts it. 250 OK S92C79B QUIT 221 [XMail 1.24 ESMTP Server] service closing transmission channel So the eMail was accepted because epodworks.com is a custom domain which is then redirected to epodworks.net -- both domain are on the same xMail Server -- that's the problem! Use alias domains for that. OK. I'll research that... So with this discovery I deleted the custom domains for epodworks.com, epodwork.com and epodwork.net -- epodworks.net is the real domain so that is still present in the config. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. Willow Grove, PA 19090 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Bounced eMail messags
I have a stock V1.24 out of the box -- only filter installed is xbmf.c. Never heard about xbmf !?!? No link in xmailserver.org home page in available tools :/ I missed somethink usefull ? xbmf was developed to deal with the eMail tail null-byte issue and another liken brethren. The Windows OSen (maybe others) has / had a problem with their MIME parsing routines such that if an eMail has improper termination sequence or tail at then end of a particular email message being recevied via POP3 it can hang eMail client programs. Since, a lot of third party apps including Euroda use the Win API they hang as well. Therefore the purpose of xmbf was to filter out these eMail messages before they get into the user's eMailbox. 99.99% of the time any of these eMails that are NOT properly terminated are hacker eMail ! For windows search CheckPop3Tail -- this registry entry adds a check to MS POP3 Service. Check out this link: http://xmailforum.homelinux.net/index.php?s=2579b675e310d8ffdc219b691909d79a showtopic=3269 Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. Willow Grove, PA 19090 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: eMail NOT automatically being requeued?
Dear David Lord- Hal Dell wrote: The problem is that I received the error code and message 451 Greylisted, please try again in 900 seconds. In the case of xMail it did not retry to send the eMail. According to RFC2505, 4xx are Transient Negative Completion reply (Temporary Error) and should result in the mail transfer being put back on queue again and a new attempt being made later. David Lord wrote: That doesn't seem right, as greylisting has been taken up by more providers I've seen temporary failure many times but xmail retries and either delivers or eventually gives up and I get an unable to deliver message. Only unable to deliver have been whilst testing and not to real addresses. Xmail default here was a notification after first temporary failure then after complete failure which might be 4 - 5 days later. I modified notification settings to 1,6,9 attempts but any that have hit 6, all test emails, never get through at all. If I'm desperate I check what is still in spool file that xmail is still trying. One unlikely possibility is the greylisting accept period is too short and after jumping past it there is no possibility mail will get through. Thanks for the input -- I've been using xMail for quite some time and checked on your suggestions. I don't understand the NotifyTryPattern option -- is this in hours? None of the docs I found describe this in detail. The problem is that with the 451 returned error from the remote MTA -- xMail seems to have considered this an error because it immediately sent back an eMail to the user with the Subject Error sending message It did NOT retry -- I double checked this by reviewing the log file. Here is what is in the LOG file (please note I removed the original from/to for privacy) : [PeekTime] 1181221418 : Thu, 7 Jun 2007 09:03:38 -0400 ErrCode = -77 ErrString = [RCPT TO:] not permitted by remote SMTP server ErrInfo = 451 Greylisted, please try again in 900 seconds SMAIL SMTP-Send MX = mail22.webcontrolcenter.com. SMTP = smtp-x1.phl1.mgfx.com From = dest To = from Failed ! SMTP-Error = 451 Greylisted, please try again in 900 seconds SMTP-Server = mail22.webcontrolcenter.com. The error code -77 translates to ERR_SMTP_BAD_RCPT_TO with the string [RCPT TO:] not permitted by remote SMTP server as shown. I don't think this is correct I am hoping that someone can read the source code better then I can to help figure this out. I don't see any place in the Server.Tab to change this behavior. For xMail to work with other MTAs it needs to follow the RFC 2505 and I think xMail should treat 451 as a soft error? Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. PO Box 22 Willow Grove, PA 19090 +1-215-830-0662 (phone) +1-215-913-6894 (cell) +1-866-549-4652 (fax) Need Support send eMail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: eMail NOT automatically being requeued?
Hello All... I have a sender who is using our xMail infrastructure to send eMails and one such eMail address is associated with the destination eMail Server mail22.webcontrolcenter.com which has implemented Greylisting (For those not familiar with Greylisting is a process by which the remote MTA rejects the eMail from a sender the first time -- every time -- assuming that a SPAM bot or alike does not have the ability to resend). The problem is that I received the error code and message 451 Greylisted, please try again in 900 seconds. In the case of xMail it did not retry to send the eMail. According to RFC2505, 4xx are Transient Negative Completion reply (Temporary Error) and should result in the mail transfer being put back on queue again and a new attempt being made later. My question is why is this the xMail behavior given the above? Is this something I can change in the config. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. PO Box 22 Willow Grove, PA 19090 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: Receiving Mail multiple times
I've tracked this as much as I can and this is what I've found: At no time do the messages exist on the server twice...they are *only* received twice by the client. It does seem to happen to some people more than others, which leads me to believe it's a double-click the Send/Receive button issue, but when I test it the second request is rejected since the POP server only allows a single connection per individual. Are you sure they are *only* received the eMails twice? NOT more then that? Since, I'm coming into the middle of this eMail exchange in the -- I don't have all of the facts of your situation I had a problem like yours and was caused by the long time standing issues with mail clients on Windows due to the POP3 Tail issue - the symptoms that you state are nearly identical. David created a filter to not allow these messages in the queue. If you don't already have the filter installed I would highly recommend installing it. (Someone on this list may be able to tell the location to download the filter -- I don't see it listed on xmailserver.org -- it was mailed around at the time). POP3 Tail issue is caused by spam and other hacker attempts at DOS targeted at the eMail clients by intentionally corrupting the normal double CR LF at the bottom of the eMail message byte stream. An eMail that is corrupted in this way causes the email client to never complete downloading the eMailbox the mailbox is never cleared and then you get your Emails over and over again. This is a safety mechanism in the client to prevent accidental erasure of eMail messages in the case of a dropped IP connection. I'm not sure this will help you... Let us know... Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. PO Box 22 Willow Grove, PA 19090 +1-215-830-0662 (phone) +1-866-549-4652 (fax) Need Support send eMail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: www.xmailserver.org down?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Drake Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 9:20 PM To: xmail@xmailserver.org Subject: [xmail] www.xmailserver.org down? Is the website down for anyone else? I can't seem to get to it. Yes, me too... Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. PO Box 22 Willow Grove, PA 19090 +1-215-830-0662 (phone) Need MS Web Hosting send questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: SPAM, Anti-Spy, Anti-Virus, SPF Filter Advice
Emmanuel Gonzalez - an someone advise me to find a spam tool working on windows 2003 server Again, I won't change my Xmail Server ! You did a fabulous work Davide. disclosure I am a reseller for a line of products by SonicWALL.com/disclosure I'm getting inundated by SPAM too and it's probably more then doubled in the past 4 months or so. I trying to work this out too. I would say also recommend making SPF entries for all of the domains you manage. RDNS, MX and A records checks don't really do the job to reduce SPAM if you are an ISP/ASP like me -- cause a lot of eMail Servers out there are really configured correctly and cutomers complain they don't get eMail. You can check to see how well you eMail servers are set up by going to DNSReport.com and type in your domain and click on the DNS Report button. I would like to see a C version of the SPF filter which could go a long way to knock out a lot of SPAM -- the current PL version of the filter is a litte slow. Check out www.OpenSPF.org. Depending on the volume of eMail you get -- separate external filters could do the job. I think the line of Security products by SonicWALL can help you. I am using this following tiered approach. My SonicWALL Firewall PRO 2040 (or soon to be upgraded PRO 4060) does the Anti-virus and Anti-SpyWare filtering at the Firewall along with RBL Spamhaus.org plus Intrusion Protection. This way the Firewall severers the TCP connection before the MTA will even see it. For example I just turned on RBL Spamhaus.org on the Firewall this past Sunday and over 60,000 connections have been blocked since then. By doing this at the Firewall I also lighten the load on the xMail Server. The next layer I plan to install soon is the SonicWALL eMail Security Server which comes in appliance or Windows Software Only versions which filters out the SPAM. The advantage of this product that they gather signatures from about 1M Desktops to help determine what is SPAM or not in real time. Again this is a separate standalone pre-filter to the xMail Server. The eMail Security Server also has subscriptions for McAfee and Kaspersky if you don't want to do or the need the SonicWALL Firewall thing. This is only one idea -- if you look at www.xMailServer.org you can find various Plugins for spam filtering solutions and other things. However, keep in mind these scripts run out of process from xMail and can slow down the server xMail lives on -- so make sure you test everthing and monitor the server after you add something. I hope this helps... Good Luck... Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: I'm trying to migrate to V1.24
Hello all... I attempted a migration to v1.24 and also tighten down xMail SMTP server to reject more SPAM. I have set CheckMailerDomain=1 and SMTP-RDNSCheck=1. I would first like somone point me to a web page or other documenation that can provide me a little detail about these checks and how the 220 message plays a role in these checks. Also, after upgrading I'm getting a lot of SMTP=ESSL errors and I need to understand what causes this so I can fix what ever I missed in the additional setup of v1.24. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: I'm trying to migrate to V1.24
Rob- I was just about to try that... Why does the default config cause xMail SMTP to fail to receive some eMails and not others? I looked up the server.tab variables -- http://www.xmailserver.org/Readme.html#server_tab_variables [SMTP-TLS] Ask XMail to try to negotiate TLS sessions with remote SMTP servers. If set to ``0'' XMail will never try to use STARTTLS. If set to ``1'', XMail will try to establish a TLS link, and will fall back to non-encrypted link in case the remote server does not support TLS. If set to ``2'', XMail will try to establish a TLS link and will give up in case this will fail. Default is ``0''. [EnableCTRL-TLS] Enable CTRL TLS negotiation (default ``1''). [EnablePOP3-TLS] Enable POP3 TLS (STLS) negotiation (default ``1''). [EnableSMTP-TLS] Enable SMTP TLS (STARTTLS) negotiation (default ``1''). Note that in the v1.24 default server.tab file the above values are commented out -- maybe the defaults should be ZERO across the board. The way I interpreted the change log section about SSL was that if you wanted this feature to work you needed to follow the setup instructions. Can the xMail application defaults be changed or can the defaults in the server.tab be changed so that a standard install without SSL will work? Thanks for the help, Hal... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Arends Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:36 PM To: xmail@xmailserver.org Subject: [xmail] Re: I'm trying to migrate to V1.24 TO ANY ONE THAT IS MIGRATING TO 1.24 Please either: 1. configure the crypto keys according to the doco. Or 2. add these lines to your server.tab SMTP-TLS[tab]0[crlf] EnableCTRL-TLS[tab]0[crlf] EnableSMTP-TLS[tab]0[crlf] EnablePOP3-TLS[tab]0[crlf] You will get SMTP=ESSL errors otherwise. As for your other options I don't know - someone else will have to answer this. Rob :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: New Error?
Can someone define what this error message SMTP=ESSL means? Is not list at http://xmail.topconcepts.net/index.php/Log_Files. Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. Willow Grove, PA 19090 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[xmail] Re: 220 Hello problem?
Hello all... I am running V1.22 and in my server.tab I have the following lines: RootDomainsmtp.phl1.epodworks.net POP3Domainsmtp.phl1.epodworks.net HeloDomainsmtp.phl1.epodworks.net However, the server is anwsering [EMAIL PROTECTED]. I ran DnsReport against my server and this is what I get back: WARNING: One or more of your mailservers is claiming to be a host other than what it really is (the SMTP greeting should be a 3-digit code, followed by a space or a dash, then the host name). If your mailserver sends out E-mail using this domain in its EHLO or HELO, your E-mail might get blocked by anti-spam software. This is also a technical violation of RFC821 4.3 (and RFC2821 4.3.1). Note that the hostname given in the SMTP greeting should have an A record pointing back to the same server. Note that this one test may use a cached DNS record. smtp.phl1.epodworks.net claims to existent host [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 220 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] service ready; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 00:26:57 -0500 Any suggest on how to fix this? Or is DnsReport just wrong? Thanks, Hal Dell Managing Partner ePodWorks.net, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe xmail in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line help in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
