On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 11:43:58AM +0300, Joseph Okech wrote:
Problem is, am trying to do recipient verification when exim accepts the mail
on port 25, but all verifications pass since amavis accepts all mails from
exim without any checks. Doing a verification after amavis scanning is no use
Hi,
Am having some difficulty on doing recipient verification on my servers. The
setup is as follows:
exim-4.69-33 listens on port 25, accepts mail and forwards to
amavisd-new-2.5.3-2 listening on port 10024, scans the mail for spam and
viruses then forwards the mail back to exim on port
On Friday 23 May 2008 12:16:56 pm Dave Evans wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 11:43:58AM +0300, Joseph Okech wrote:
Problem is, am trying to do recipient verification when exim accepts the
mail on port 25, but all verifications pass since amavis accepts all
mails from exim without any checks.
--On 22 May 2008 23:30:19 +0100 Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 22 May 2008, Ian Eiloart wrote:
I was having a look at lemonade
http://www.lemonadeformobiles.com/index.html, and it seems to me that
one of the components - BURL. Message Submission BURL Extension (RFC
4468) -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 05:27:05AM +0800, W B Hacker wrote:
I updated to exim4 and now I got another problem: At the moment it
is not possible to use fetchmail to get my mails from the server.
Can anybody explain this?
You said:
not possible to
On Fri, 23 May 2008, Ian Eiloart wrote:
I guess either could be achieved by piping through a suitable program, and
Exim's routers are smart enough to decide which messages require treatment.
No, BURL would be implemented in Exim's front-end. The routers and
transports would not be involved.
Just a thought
You extract the registrar barrier part of the host name and the same for
the helo. Many hosts that send good email this would match. For example
yahoo.com would have yahoo.com in both the host and the helo.
Then after tracking these and developing a list of hosts that do
Marc Perkel wrote:
Just a thought
You extract the registrar barrier part of the host name and the same for
the helo. Many hosts that send good email this would match. For example
yahoo.com would have yahoo.com in both the host and the helo.
Then after tracking these and developing
Marc Sherman wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Just a thought
You extract the registrar barrier part of the host name and the same for
the helo. Many hosts that send good email this would match. For example
yahoo.com would have yahoo.com in both the host and the helo.
Then after
Consider this. Suppose a host send email and their helo matches the host
RDNS, and I store that. Then later a different host uses the same helo,
but they have no RDNS or that are on a dynamic IP. Wouldn't that be a
strong indicator of spam?
--
## List details at
Consider this. Suppose a host send email and their helo matches the
host
RDNS, and I store that. Then later a different host uses the same helo,
but they have no RDNS or that are on a dynamic IP. Wouldn't that be a
strong indicator of spam?
Consider a mail host provider that provides email
Eli Sand wrote:
Consider this. Suppose a host send email and their helo matches the
host
RDNS, and I store that. Then later a different host uses the same helo,
but they have no RDNS or that are on a dynamic IP. Wouldn't that be a
strong indicator of spam?
To Marc:
Dunno if it is
12 matches
Mail list logo
