David F. Skoll wrote:
>Dirk the Daring wrote:
>
>
>
>> I don't have any problems with filter_helo. When it returns a REJECT,
>>the SMTP conversation does not seem to progress any further.
>>
>>
>
>Really? Hmm...
>
>Anyway, it's gone. I don't think the extra code is worth it.
>
>Regards,
David F. Skoll wrote:
>Marco Meier wrote:
>
>
>
>>i think the mimedefang-filter manpage should be changed according to
>>this. It says: "This lets you reject connections after the HELO/EHLO
>>SMTP command.". In fact, they aren't rejected right there.
>>
>>
>
>Actually, I have a better idea:
Anne Bennett wrote:
We do our HELO checks in filter_relay,
How do you do that?
I thought that neither the $Helo variable nor the commands file (from wich the
helo string can be read) was available that early in the mimedefang process.
/Jonas
--
Jonas Eckerman, FSDB & Fruktträdet
http://what
Dirk the Daring wrote:
>I don't have any problems with filter_helo. When it returns a REJECT,
> the SMTP conversation does not seem to progress any further.
Really? Hmm...
Anyway, it's gone. I don't think the extra code is worth it.
Regards,
David.
___
Dirk the Daring wrote:
>I use filter_helo and am quite happy with it. I successfully reject
> obviously fraudulent HELOs at filter_helo.
At least, you *think* you do.
If you test it, you'll discover they're only rejected at MAIL FROM: time.
I've already removed filter_helo from the svn vers
I don't have any problems with filter_helo. When it returns a REJECT,
the SMTP conversation does not seem to progress any further.
I'm using sendmail v8.13.8, MIMEDefang v2.57 and Perl v8.5.6. Perhaps
the problem described originally is not really with filter_helo.
__
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, David F. Skoll wrote:
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
is next to useless.
No, please don't do that.
If people are unhappy with the exact way that filter_helo work
remove filter_helo,
Go.
We score for bad helo, but we want to see first whether we get
smtp auth, or the recipient is our abuse address, so we would not
want to test it that soon.
Joseph Brennan
Columbia University Information Technology
___
NOTE:
On 11/08/2006 02:17 PM, John Rudd wrote:
Adam Lanier wrote:
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 10:24 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
is next to useless.
I won't miss it.
I
John Rudd wrote:
> I wont miss it either.
It's gone.
Responding to Anne Bennett from Concordia: MIMEDefang doesn't
implement a 1-to-1 mapping of milter callbacks. It has its own
filter_begin/filter/filter_end abstraction, for example, so I'm
not too concerned about removing filter_helo.
Regar
Adam Lanier wrote:
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 10:24 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
is next to useless.
I won't miss it.
I wont miss it either.
_
"David F. Skoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asks:
> If I completely remove filter_helo, will anyone morn its passing?
We do our HELO checks in filter_relay, so it won't be a problem for
us. On the other hand, is consistency an issue? That is, if the
milter protocol allows for an intervention at a cer
Le mercredi 8 novembre 2006 16:24, David F. Skoll a écrit :
> Marco Meier wrote:
>
> > i think the mimedefang-filter manpage should be changed according to
> > this. It says: "This lets you reject connections after the HELO/EHLO
> > SMTP command.". In fact, they aren't rejected right there.
>
> A
David F. Skoll wrote:
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
is next to useless.
as i don't see anything that can't be done in filter_recipients, this
would be less confusing.
regards,
Marco Me
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 10:24 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
> will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
> is next to useless.
I won't miss it.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed messa
> > i tried to use the fqdn helo check provided as an example in the wiki.
> > when trying to send an email using a non-fqdn helo command, it is
> > rejected after mail from, not right after helo, as the manpages
> > suggests. is it possible to have mimedefang work as described, and
> > reject the
Marco Meier wrote:
> i think the mimedefang-filter manpage should be changed according to
> this. It says: "This lets you reject connections after the HELO/EHLO
> SMTP command.". In fact, they aren't rejected right there.
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will a
David F. Skoll wrote:
Marco Meier wrote:
i tried to use the fqdn helo check provided as an example in the wiki.
when trying to send an email using a non-fqdn helo command, it is
rejected after mail from, not right after helo, as the manpages
suggests. is it possible to have mimedefang work as d
Marco Meier wrote:
> i tried to use the fqdn helo check provided as an example in the wiki.
> when trying to send an email using a non-fqdn helo command, it is
> rejected after mail from, not right after helo, as the manpages
> suggests. is it possible to have mimedefang work as described, and
> r
hello.
i tried to use the fqdn helo check provided as an example in the wiki.
when trying to send an email using a non-fqdn helo command, it is
rejected after mail from, not right after helo, as the manpages
suggests. is it possible to have mimedefang work as described, and
reject the mail right
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matt Kettler wrote:
> Gilles Hamel wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> We are running v3.1.5 with mimedefang.
>> Here is our setup :
>>
>> our own MTA with spamassassin ---/-- MTA at our ISP, our MX is HERE
>> w.x.y.z / INTERNET
>>
>> In the local.cf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Philip Prindeville wrote:
I don't grasp the discussion about this topic, you can simply provide a
md_syslog() wrapper for own :-/
I use md_syslog() extensively in MIMEDefang, no single %-sequence in them.
Bye,
- --
Steffen K
22 matches
Mail list logo