Ian Mitchell wrote:
Personally, I'm highly opposed to blocking outbound port 25. There are
some of us who don't have the resources to run a domain on a business
class line. Second off, there are those of us who take security very
seriously and work hard to ensure our micro domains don't become
Ian Mitchell wrote:
I have two broadband options. Cable and satellite. And it's a matter of
picking your poisons at that point. I looked up dialup and no, I just
could not drag myself to suffering with a 56K connection. Not to mention,
it's damn hard to find Linux modems now-a-days.
I have a
hormel.
I'm not a legal expert, but I vaguely remember something like that..
-Ben
--
Ben Kamen - O.D.T, S.P.
--
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.benjammin.net
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gPG Pub Key - http
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
About time, too...
As a sidenote: They should also be writing a letter to Mr. Bill (Oo Noo)
asking his darn company to stop writing so many darn bugs into the OS.
We just all want to be free... IE/Outlook free that is. ;)
-Ben
p.s. I think we need a new
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2005/05/zombies.htm
... will send letters to more than 3,000 ISPs around the world, urging them to
employ protective measures to prevent their customers' computers from being
hijacked by spammers. The measures include:
* blocking a common
Jonathan Maliepaard wrote:
Also people use a
lot of foul language and sexual references, they get nabbed every time.
Keyword filters? Your company uses keyword filters?
So are Breast, penis and vagina considered sexual references? I just thought
they were anatomical terms for various body parts.
David F. Skoll wrote:
The email server, viruswall3.guiltyparty.hidden, did not deliver the
message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject [Mimedefang]
Scanning plain-text attachments, part II because the message contains
1 or more files with .eml extension(s).
I will go away
Stephane Lentz wrote:
For those who don't follow the SpamAssassin list there
are some new spam messages in German (racist ones apparently)
Some extra rules are available on :
http://mailscanner.prolocation.net/german.cf
News coverage :
http://isc.sans.org/
http://www.viruslist.com/en/weblog
Ya,
Joseph Brennan wrote:
--On Friday, May 13, 2005 5:24 PM -0400 David F. Skoll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/05/13/HNtrendmicropatent_1.html
The Trend Micro patent explains technology that scans e-mail and
Internet data transfers for viruses at gateways and servers,
Ray Spinhirne wrote:
We are in the process of updated an HPUX server and MIMEDefang.
I'm pretty sure this is a sendmail problem and not a MIMEDefang
problem but perhaps someone could give me a pointer. (It's late
and I'm not thinking were well.)
At any rate here is what's happenning.
Mail
Christopher Roberts wrote:
Thanks for the very quick response!
Have you tried sending an email to them by hand?
Okay, so here's where I reveal my ignorance! How would I do that? Just a
pointer would be helpful - do you just mean in sendmail, or is there a
way to send SMTP commands manually?
You
James Ebright wrote:
On Tue, 03 May 2005 09:53:38 -0500, Ben Kamen wrote
This is a misconfiguration of MS exhchange, it can be configured to return the
SMTP response code and message, it just does not do it out of the box.
Really?? When I guess TI.com (Yes, Texas Instruments - one of thr world
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All,
We block port 25 at the firewall so all outgoing mail has to go out
our gateway.
(snip)
Obviously we have to allow SMTP for internal legit clients on our network.
Is SMTP AUTH the answer?
YES
Write a terms-of-use that all users have to sign
James Ebright wrote:
You can whitelist users or entire domains from the rDNS check in your access
file using Niel's hack.
I know... but it just seemed that while I was playing by all the rules, the
slobs were just making my access file grow to biblical proportions. (shaking
head some more)
In defang's ~/.spamassassin/ directory...
Are these supposed to reconciled/cleaned up automatically?
I'm gonna go look around the SA website - but have a feeling someone here might
have better information than what's online.
Thanks,
-Ben
___
Visit
Rich West wrote:
Personally, we've looked in to it. We tend to agree that AOL's position
is somewhat aggressive since their techs are usually behind the time and
don't support their own new technologies well. But, political opinions
aside, we were leary about implementing it because, frankly,
David F. Skoll wrote:
Oops, sorry! I adapted it from something we use with CanIt, and
forgot that the mimedefang init script doesn't have a status.
Anyway, if you know shell programming, you should be able to detect if
mimedefang is running by checking the return status of:
kill -0
-ray wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Ben Kamen wrote:
Especially if your problem is a large excess of $$$ in your budget... a
few pSeries machines would fix that!!!
hahahah,
I'm running AIX (Bull version) on a 133MHz Motorola Atlas 604 board in a rack
with sendmail 8.13.2 - Works great and is cheap
Lisa Casey wrote:
Hi again,
Oliver wrote:
there is a status option for redhat, what distro do you?
Try downloading the 2.51 .tar.gz and just copy/edit the
redhat/mimedefang.init file
to your /etc/init.d/ dir
I'm currently using 2.48 on Redhat. I don't want to upgrade right now
(unless I have to)
Arthur Corliss wrote:
This is getting off-topic, but for me a good Power5 system with
micro-partitioning and virtual I/O running a mix of AIX Linux is much more
cost-effective than a blade server, *especially* when it comes to resource
management...
drool
Ya, it'd be cool to have one of
Lisa Casey wrote:
Hi,
Sigh, no I think it's probably me that doesn't understand. Mimedefang
is runing as a milter under Sendmail. I don't start mimedefang using
/etc/init.d/mimedefang, I start it using /etc/init.d/sendmail. This
script starts Sendmail and Mimedefang. When I installed
David F. Skoll wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Ben Kamen wrote:
The person I've been having the problems with is quoting RFC821, but
forgetting he's breaking RFC1123 which is the amendment to 821.
The latest is RFC 2821.
Thanks,
I'm looking over it and the section reads more like 821 than 1123.
I'm
James Ebright wrote:
Anyway, still sifting some of this.. maybe I will change my mind but bottom
line is.. I think your Norton product is broke!
It's not my system. It belongs to someone I help out. But as I already told
the other admin - this extent, I do believe this could be done better.
I've now run into 2 universities that are blocking email based on invalid
hostnames at the HELO sequence.
From what I can see with RFC1123,
(see http://www.freesoft.org/CIE/RFC/1123/90.htm) this seems to be a no-no.
5.2.5 HELO Command: RFC-821 Section 3.5
The sender-SMTP MUST ensure that the
So far, from internal or people dup'ing your server, those sound reasonable..
But I'm talking about any host outside a domain/netblock's control.
The person I've been having the problems with is quoting RFC821, but
forgetting he's breaking RFC1123 which is the amendment to 821.
Am I wrong in
James Ebright wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 16:17:45 -0600, Ben Kamen wrote
It doesnt sound Kosher to me... but... I have to ask.. why is your server not
sending him a FQDN that resolves correctly in DNS as the HELO?
It's a norton anti-virus gateway sitting behind a firewall. Right now, it just
Let's here it again for the USPTO...
USPTO, where the P stands for Putz. (c) 2005, Me. (wink)
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Ole Craig wrote:
On 03/09/05 at 16:53, 'twas brillig and Jerry Vonau scrobe:
Hi All:
Just need to pick some brains here. My mail server is having trouble
sending mail
to one mail server, when I telnet to port 25 I get this back:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] jerry]# telnet
Wow...
Smells like well, not teen spirit, but maybe desparation..
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
MIMEDefang@lists.roaringpenguin.com
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
Joey McKnight wrote:
How can i block emails with words like Viagra, penis, using
Mimedefang.
You don't. You leave it to the basian filter.. Blocking by keywords is a
horribly inaccurate thing to do.
Let's say I wanted to make a joke about viagra. Or talk about donkey's,
commonly referred to as
Ben Kamen wrote:
What KAM said, I've posted for all to see and I think says it best:
http://www.benjammin.net/www/pages/spam/
Sorry, I had KAM on the brain from reading a previous post from him, I meant,
Kelson Vibber
-Ben
___
Visit http
Michael Sims wrote:
I have to admit that I just don't understand all of the anti-Sendmail
sentiment I
see all over various mailing lists and forums such as Slashdot. Everytime the
subject comes up there are tons of people saying the absolute worst thing you
can
do is run Sendmail or there's no
-ray wrote:
I have max daemon children set to 250. Occasionally one machine will
open 250 connections, probably spamming, so sendmail stops new connections.
Is there a sendmail way to limit # of connections by ip address?
In /etc/mail/access
ClientConn:ip addr limit rate
See the README
John wrote:
Read the docs for the latest sendmail releases after 8.13.x There's
tons ( Well, maybe not tons.) of ways to screw up people connecting
fanatically to your mailserver. I just loved it when they brought that
stuff out in 8.13.0 G
You and me both. Good stuff Maynard.
-Ben
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't that a sendmail 8.13 feature?
I believe so. (what!?! Isn't EVERYONE on the latest release? grin)
Sorry - forgot to mention it...
So - UpGRADE!
:)
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang
Arthur Corliss wrote:
From what you're saying, then, that would only work for him if he knows the
IP/networks he's getting hit by ahead of time. It doesn't sound like it would
prevent rate-limit connections from *any* IP address. For that you'd really
need to keep track of simultaneous connects
-ray wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Sven Willenberger wrote:
I've heard good stuff about greet_pause and plan to use it as soon as i
get to 8.13.x. What delay do you all typically use to weed out zombies
but respect legit servers? Can you disable greet_pause for the local
network?
I use 5
George Kuetemeyer wrote:
There's another issue with non-business-related email that wasn't
brought up in that link. A few years ago we started noticing that on
many days 50% or more of our internal SMTP traffic consisted of
joke/inspirational attachments. We've since started
quarantining/bouncing
http://www.forbes.com/2005/02/16/cx_ah_0216tentech.html?partner=technology_newsletter
I think you're all ugly and your momma's dress you funny.
Filter that. ;)
Notice how it presently only seems to work with Exchange.
In a way, that infers that only us intelligent folks use behemoth's like
I thought the definition of ISP was somewhat flexible in the definition as a
remedy for people who do service their own email and such... (i.e. I
hold/service email for more than 1 domain. I think the language could be
interpreted in such a way that it would make me an ISP because of the
I would think ISP's would want a greylisting filter on their inbound-outbound
ports...
But with my recent experience with my local ISP (SBC) proves to me (since I
directly asked the half a dozen or so SBC tech rep's on the line if anyone
knew anything about TCP/IP - no from all) I doubt if
Paul Murphy wrote:
Ben wrote:
I would think ISP's would want a greylisting filter on their
inbound-outbound ports...
If the spam is coming from their legitimate customers, and is indistinguishable
from normal mail, this will add nothing and annoy their customers, especially
when those using
How many of you out there use spamtraps with spamassassin??
I'm just curious about the feeling of others using them...
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I asked a while back and didn't see an answer... how often do people like to
reinit their bayes databases??
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
--
Ben Kamen - O.D.T., S.P.
--
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.benjammin.net
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gPG
I did consulting for someone who asked if they should allow client-updates...
(school district)... I chuckled and said, imagine 500 instances of laptops named
brittney.. or insert famous icon here
Hehehe..
-Ben
Michael Weiner wrote:
Has anyone used mime-defang filters to do any portion of the
Ian Mitchell wrote:
As for the knock toward Symantec developers, having been a programmer at
one time, I would take offense to that comment. I highly doubt Symantec
has conceeded to the whims of spyware developers. I would be more inclined
to think they simply don't care because it's outside of
,
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
--
Ben Kamen - O.D.T, S.P.
--
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Can I just say,
Thank you Bill.
Kawa-bunghole!
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
we try and warn - but Nooo they gotta put that kind of crap in.
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
how old is it?? (What ver?)
Download a new one if you're not just...
UW-IMAP includes an ipop daemon...
-Ben
Ray Spinhirne wrote:
THis is OT but maybe someone can help.
We have the HPUX supplied version of Qpopper running on our admin mail server.
It seems to work ok under light load. However,
Cor Bosman wrote:
How about scaling? I'm pretty sure my ISP will run (screaming, no
doubt), from a scenario in which they rely on their customers to keep
their list of valid addresses current.
If your ISP allows you to have mail servers behind theirs and they are
the front line MX and forward
Richard Laager wrote:
Example:
Let's say that I work for a hypothetical ACME Widgets, Inc. My e-mail
address is [EMAIL PROTECTED] A potential customer,
[EMAIL PROTECTED], tries to send me an e-mail message from his laptop
using a public access point in his hotel. The network he's on is not
listed
Blackberry?
My CEO has one of these and uses it a lot. All messages must
be sent through their server but we want the 'From:' to be
his desktop address.
--
Ben Kamen - O.D.T, S.P.
--
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Cor Bosman wrote:
That's just it - if your sales guy is at hotel with his laptop, he could
use AUTH/STARTTLS and actually relay through his company's mail server.
Thus the email from [EMAIL PROTECTED] would be delivered by
mail.acmewidgets.com to where it needed to go... SPF would be valid.
Wouldn't that be funny that everyone started rejecting mail from them because
they didn't do that. Yet, they pushed for the deadline for everyone else to
have SPF published? Hahaha...
Well, a quick check shows:
MSN:NO
Hotmail:NO
Yahoo: NO
AOL:YES
/listinfo/mimedefang
--
Ben Kamen - O.D.T, S.P.
--
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.benjammin.net
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gPG Pub Key - http://www.benjammin.net/www/pages/library
I will be visiting MS next week, maybe I can provide further information
after that meeting
Make sure to wear a rain coat! (and not because you're going to Washington
State... more like BS-Deflection-wear)...
:)
-Ben
___
Visit
Amanda might be worth looking into...
But the best was is to connect a local mega-tape or somethng and tar or dd.
-Ben
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am about to upgrade my mail filters and I would like a quick way to
revert back to the previous environement. For regular backups, we use
Tivoli
I'm having a weird problem with attachments that are large causing a tempfail
with AIX and Bellmail - I'm emailing here since I have a feeling this started
when I started using mimedefang...
If this proves not to be the problem I'll ask the sendmail guys...
Here's my environment:
AIX 4.3.2
Those were my thoughts exactly - after looking at the man pages for both
programs... looks like bellmail is the program I want to run for sendmail to
just deliver mail. it just uses the switch - '-t' to send to a user...
so my prog/args should just be:
/bin/bellmail
and
'-t $u'
How interesting
...
-Ben
Ben Kamen wrote:
Those were my thoughts exactly - after looking at the man pages for both
programs... looks like bellmail is the program I want to run for
sendmail to just deliver mail. it just uses the switch - '-t' to send to
a user...
so my prog/args should just be:
/bin/bellmail
sounds like a bad idea... imagine all the admins you would be emailing who would
actually care or be allowed to do anything else due to politics.. ugh.
Email is just a mess.
-Ben
Kenneth Porter wrote:
I seem to get a lot of automated replies from virus scanners responding
to forged viruses
2 config files - run bind 2 times binding the service to each interface. (that's
the important part - MUST have 2 ethernet interfaces)
Also - MS DNS is very evil. VERY evil. I would highly advise against running it.
-Ben
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lazy is more like it. It's possible to run split
they did release one code snippet which was quickly digested by the
industry's experts who resolved it was not infringing... at that point,
the suit became much more of a joke as most people said, ~ if that's the
bext they've got.. and so forth...
-Ben
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Kevin A.
Where would I be best putting a check for $SendmailMacros{auth_authen}
to see if someone relaying has auth'd?
And what action would I use? Just action_accept()?
I don't want to do anything to the email - I want MIMEdefang to just get out of
the way... heheh.. waste no more time!
Thanks,
-Ben
nevermind...
--Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
Although it still shows in mail.log that X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang was added to
the header... should that be there?
-Ben
Ben Kamen wrote:
nevermind...
--Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL
Actually, cyrus SASL is nice if you want to run sendmail AUTH which is what I do
with it...
-Ben
David F. Skoll wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, David Kolar wrote:
I have followed the Micky Hill HOWTO to the letter.
That HOWTO is way too extensive -- you don't need Cyrus IMAP to run
MIMEDefang;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5290386
Once again, we say, Thank you MicroSoft...
Anyone got an httpd log finger print I can build a graph from??
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hey there,
I haven't used watch-mimedefang in a long time and I fired it up today and get
this error on the screen:
MXCommand: connect: permission denied
???
Is that an X error or something else?
Thanks,
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and
Root permissions.. Nevermind.
-Ben
Ben Kamen wrote:
Hey there,
I haven't used watch-mimedefang in a long time and I fired it up today
and get this error on the screen:
MXCommand: connect: permission denied
???
Is that an X error or something else
Haven't read up - what does SocketMAP do?
-Ben
David F. Skoll wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Marco Berizzi wrote:
Anyone have tried it with MD 2.43?
8.13.0.Beta1 worked fine; I assume 8.13.0 will.
I'll also be making support for Sendmail's SOCKETMAP option official with
the next MIMEDefang
I would have to agree - they are pure evil. Not that anyone has quickly
made it to my spam list... but evil they are indeed.
Hey - I have a quick question: in SA there's skip_rbl_checks which I
have turned ON since I do RBL checking in sendmail - but I want to do
rDNS checking through SA...
I
David F. Skoll wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
I just had that discussion re: HAM / SPAM. I vote we change it to kosher
and non-kosher email ;-)
Tecnically, Kosher and Treif. But I think ham/spam are too deeply
ingrained to be disloged. :-) They're also
I have and I am also running something like that - I wrote a TCL script that
does exactly what you're talking about...
It's features are:
routes IP's into the 'route add -blackhole' almost immediately.
Runs continuously based on tcl's fileevent (as to not suck CPU time)
Keeps a table in
Which brings up another thought:
That of using such gathered output to generate another DNSBL of some sort. ;)
How many bad recipients is acceptable? I have my throttling set at 2.
-Ben
David F. Skoll wrote:
Hi,
Are MIMEDefang list denizens seen a huge increase in dictionary attacks?
I know I am.
I agree. Content based filtering is never good.. You can't filter ideas.. Only
your users can do that.
I've run into filters sending mail to various places I don't remember the
words I typed they caused the bounce... but I sent the admins a message saying
how a$$in1ne and f*ck'n stoopid it
Ok, I tried the FAQ item and since I don't have a ENTIRE_MESSAGE file, I'm out
of luck? I just want the PART.1.BODY (.chm file)
Where can I find the fang.pl? It says contrib/fang.pl but what's the rest of the
path on that?
Thanks,
-Ben
___
Visit
Nevermind on the path.. ;)
I thought it was a web URL reference..
-Ben
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
Joseph Brennan wrote:
--On Monday, May 17, 2004 10:14 AM -0400 David F. Skoll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, there's a very large ISP in Canada (Sympatico) that shuts down
customers if it detects that they are sending out viruses. You don't get
your connectivity back until you have proven
Joseph Brennan wrote:
--On Monday, May 17, 2004 10:14 AM -0400 David F. Skoll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, there's a very large ISP in Canada (Sympatico) that shuts down
customers if it detects that they are sending out viruses. You don't get
your connectivity back until you have proven
I agree on SpamHaus.
They have rational methodology for entries in the list.
I use them and ORDB. Between those 2 and my own access list for sendmail
- I have great success at this point. Yea, maybe I get 5 SPAMs a day -
but I can live with that.
-Ben
As a sidenote, that article shows at the bottom how MS is offering a $4.5million
bounty for capture of virus authors..
Now if they just put that money into FIXING their bugs or paying for some people
who have a clue about computer security... THEN they'd be getting somewhere fast!
-Ben
NO KIDDING.
Unfortunately, some might argue that's a lot like blaming the gun manufacturer..
Personally, I think guns have their place (like for those who live in the middle
of nowhere - and such)... sloppy programming does not.
-Ben
SRAR Mail Administrator wrote:
From
Pong
Jim McCullars wrote:
ping
___
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca
MIMEDefang mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
I hope you don't mind if I link to that on my web page..
-Ben
I've created some end-user documentation to assist users in creating an
Outlook XP rule to automatically filter Spam if anyone is interested:
http://www.thompsonic.com/util/antispam/index.html
/mimedefang
--
Ben Kamen - O.D.T, S.P.
--
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.benjammin.net
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gPG Pub Key - http://www.benjammin.net/www/pages/library
Ehhh, that's what 100Mb Full Duplex via Ethernet switches are for! ;)
Michael Haro wrote:
I'm also looking into switching from the sendmail edition on solaris to
something else (sun ram is too expensive)...
It would probably be less complicated to just use the linux vscan method
with mimedefang,
Well, I did it last night - I wrote an event driven TCL script that
watches the mail log for sendmail's RCPT Flood message and then
blackholes the IP address... then, after a user specified time limit, it
will remove the blackhole automatically. Any add/delete actions are
saved in a text file
No no no, what IT needs to tell management is:
We have 2 machines... one is way faster than the other... but it still
gets bogged... if we want to keep up the war on spam, what we need is
TWO really fast machines... ;)
Put in terms that make the suits unhappy... then hardware you shall
have.
Heheh, isn't anyone else doing this? I would imagine so...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
Now you just need to add a signed peer2peer networking scheme so that
you can share that info with hosts that are also on the network and then
4. profit.
That's pretty funny...
actually.. Now that I think about it, I might have a TCL script that
with some modification could probably do this for me...
I think I might look into it this weekend... heheh.. thanks!
-Ben
Stefano McGhee wrote:
I would love to have a hook in mimedefang to
Well, first thing would be to contact the customer directly and let them
know you can't email them because of the problem you're having with their
ISP.
Then you can recommend any fine sendmail admins in your area on this list
to come and install their own sendmail server complete with
Ken Morley wrote:
Mark:
So, call AmeriTech and tell them that they need to address the RBL/ISP's
concerns about spam sent by an AmeriTech customer.
Good luck with it.
(sigh) Yea.. emphasis on luck -
first - you need to find someone who understands that problem...
So, ask them if they have
addresses and I've had to null-route three 4096 host subnets because
the idiots at ameritech didn't care...
I don't have any special love for Ameritech/SBC. I filed a complaint
against them with the Illinois Commerce Commission. Nothing ever happened.
Big surprise.
-Ben
--
Ben Kamen - O.D.T
I realize this list crosses national boundaries,
but I'm beginning to think it's time to really start hammering our local
governmental people (for those of us in the US) with complaints that
the CAN-SPAM act has done wonders... the BIG ISP's with money get to sue
while we smaller guys just get
If you're already root, just 'make install' is what you want.
-Ben
Mark Penkower wrote:
I am running Redhat Linux 9.0 and am setting up Mimedefang 2.39.
According to your instructions, to install the various libraries needed Mimedefang, I need to do the following:
perl Makefile.PL
make
make
Well, we do that for a reason... it sends spammers to the next
(unreachable) MX point after failing to send spam to the primary. I used
to use 127.0.0.1 - but people like SBC block incoming mail if the
remote's have any MX's set like that (poo!)...
Oh well.
-Ben
Andrea Venturoli wrote:
It's just quoted... no by Nick
Ok. That answers my question.
Tanks,
-Ben
Andrew J Caird wrote:
Quoting Ben Kamen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Did I miss something? Section 3.3.3 of what? :)
Yes. :) Section 3.3.3 of the book mentioned in the previous line,
sendmail Performance Tuning
101 - 200 of 206 matches
Mail list logo
