On 22/06/2023 23:01, fail2ban-users-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net wrote:
> I just set-up a new server, running postfix, with submission(s)
activated on standard ports (587, 465)
First of all, have you activated postscreen, and configured it to query
SPAMCop &c?
Postscreen is part of the pos
On 16/05/2021 10:55, Nicolas Kovacs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> One of my mail servers is running Oracle Linux 7 (a RHEL clone like
CentOS).
> These last days it's been under heavy attack, and Postfix was brought
to its
> knees a few times.
Are you running "postcreen" to help Postfix?
It's part of Postf
Has anyone else noticed the use of rolling /24 IP addresses to avoid
fail2ban being triggered?
In reviewing my logs I noticed that I was getting a bunch of attempts
from 5.188.211.{14,15,16,17,...}, spread out over a long enough interval
that fail2ban did not see them as a bad actor.
Has a
On 16/05/2020 23:29, Doug Preston via Fail2ban-users wrote:
[SNIP]
> Yea I tried it, it didn't find the lost connection after EHLO from
> unknown,
>
> I will keep trying to get it figured out. I mean I could just add
> them manually but I prefer using fail2ban and not have to manally add
> them
> Has anyone got Fail2Ban (0.9.3) working for FTP on Solaris 10?
>
> I believe the 'default' ftp was made to look like wu-ftpd, but it
> runs as an (inet) service, not a daemon. I see a wuftpd.conf file in
> filter.d - perhaps one could be built using that as a template?
>
> I'm thinking myself in
Hi,
>
> Is anyone running fail2ban with the postfix jail and postscreen? When
> I run fail2ban and postfix taking out the postfix postscreen
> component
> it works fine, this is on an f21 system with FirewallD. The issue is
> when postscreen is brought in to the picture, the blocking no longer
> w
