On 20/01/2023 19:50, Johnnie W Adams via Exim-users wrote:
Calling the ACL on all mail prevents bounces, correct?
An R-verify checks routability, and (with callout) acceptability
by the destination. If your intent is to discover nonexistent
recipients *during SMTP reception* of a message, so
Yes, the recipients are all non-local.
I was focused on preventing useless bounce messages, but now I think I take
your point: Calling the ACL on all mail prevents bounces, correct?
As to when this is called, I would put it on our egress node, which only
has acl_check_rcpt. I planned to put it
On 20/01/2023 18:18, Johnnie W Adams via Exim-users wrote:
I've been doing some research on recipient verification to eliminate
bounces, and am wondering if it's as simple something like this at the end
of my ACL list:
acl_check_vrfy:
deny
senders = ''
!verify =
Hi, folks,
I've been doing some research on recipient verification to eliminate
bounces, and am wondering if it's as simple something like this at the end
of my ACL list:
acl_check_vrfy:
deny
senders = ''
!verify = recipient/callout
Surely it's not that simple,
> From: S?awomir Dworaczek
> where is the error in the ACL
>
> continue = ${run{SHELL -c "echo $sender_host_address
> >>/var/spool/exim/blacklists/blocked_IPs;\N{\N echo Subject:
> $sender_host_address blocked; echo; echo for bruteforce auth cracking
> attempt.;\N}\N | EXIMBINARY
On 19/01/2023 17:32, The Doctor via Exim-users wrote:
I assumed that you were blocking the pair
(src ip 46.148.40.108, target port 25)
and was checking that you are also blocking
(src ip 46.148.40.108, target port 465)
Could this cause a 601 error?
Possibly a typo? SMTP does
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:57:04AM +, Andrew C Aitchison via Exim-users
wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, The Doctor wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 08:44:30AM +, Andrew C Aitchison via Exim-users
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, 18 Jan 2023, The Doctor via Exim-users wrote:
> >>
> On Thu,
