ip in this stage, it does not scan body
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net/?coupon=cust37098
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Li
On Tue, July 15, 2008 21:04, Markus Quaritsch wrote:
> So I'd like to know why the mail is not accepted although the quota is
not reached
cd /cluebringer
grep -r 'more transa' *
no hits
so its not policyd
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net
On Thu, February 21, 2008 11:08, Cami Sardinha wrote:
>> another 1000 mails could be sent after midnight. Or maybe I'm wrong ?
yes read more into policyd.conf about blacklist
> Every night at 00:00, "TRUNCATE" your table. That way you will:
> * keep your table at absolute minimal
> * only keep
On Wed, December 5, 2007 09:30, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote:
> Or are there any other options we should tune ?
reject_unlisted_recipient before check_policy_service ?
turn down the 500 to 50 will help reduce the graylist aswell, postgrey uses 10
as default
if you have alot of tribbles with count
On Thu, November 29, 2007 18:18, John Beaver wrote:
> Please start a new thread for new topics.
i belive its related to the thread here
> Most MUA's do not report this (outlook, OE are two). You cannot (and
> should not) depend on the MUA's to provide this information. The only
> reliable way
On Thu, November 29, 2007 17:44, Tobias Kreidl wrote:
> We ended up with some complex rules that regulate which messages get
> sent to policyd and which bypass it.
if done without smtp auth it will be unstable design
--
On Thu, November 29, 2007 17:05, Tobias Kreidl wrote:
> Our needs and hence our tables are simple and only take up a couple of
> megabytes; we process several hundred thousand messages a day, so
> efficiency is important.
how many users sends size=0 in policy ?
some mua's is imho brokken on thi
On Wed, October 17, 2007 16:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I will respond to your message when I
i recommend a better vacation responder, just keep it if you want some to
steal your home, now thay perfectly know when you are home, silly ?
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
On Sat, October 13, 2007 07:41, Voytek Eymont wrote:
> yes, RSN I'll have smtp auth setup, I'm 'in progress' setting new mail server
okay, just use it as last resort, for keep it up when ssl/tls is broken :-)
> pls point me towards some how tos, not sure how
policyd table policy controls if on
On Sat, October 13, 2007 09:59, Tony Earnshaw wrote:
> To my mind it should come last in smtpd_recipient_restrictions. What's
> the point of greylisting stuff that Postfix would reject anyway?
this is true as long policyd cant use smtpd_restriction_classes as results
policyd can be used with su
On Fri, September 14, 2007 08:09, Voytek Eymont wrote:
> ---
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> permit_mynetworks,
> check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/pop-before-smtp,
remember clients can be behind nat, that mean you accept relaying for more
then one custommer here alone
> reject_un
On Mon, October 8, 2007 08:29, Cami Sardinha wrote:
> start:
> goto start;
> ^^^
maybe it works, but using goto in c is bad programming style
if you have to do it
do
{
} while count(bar() > 10)
did you not learn comal in school ?
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam
On Fri, September 7, 2007 10:46, Xavier Beaudouin wrote:
>>> How many concurrent smtpd processes do you have on your MX?
>> Up to 1.5k per MX in peak during bot attacks.
> Hum. Anvil on postfix is a very good idea to avoid too mutch ressources
> utilization.
there needs to be limit on smtpd_polic
On Tue, September 4, 2007 15:34, Artem Bokhan wrote:
> There is no hole when MTA checks rctps.
> As for me, I patched the source. I don't insist on patching the
> distrib, I just said, that it would be nice )
please show mx record for NULL recipient, that would be easy right ?
--
This message
On Tue, September 4, 2007 14:58, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> Sorry, I was too fast here. Obviously this will not help as it will only
> turn a 4xx into a 5xx. I'm afraid you'll have to whitelist hosts that do
> sender verification...
there is no need to greylist users that does not exists
--
Th
On Tue, August 28, 2007 21:04, Tobias Kreidl wrote:
> If one is running multiple SMTP servers, is there any harm running
> "cleanup" from each one
> at the same time via a cron job, or is it better to stagger the times a bit?
you meant policyd from more then one postfix ?
if you have 2 or more m
On Tue, August 28, 2007 13:40, Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
>> is postfix running behind a router ?
> yes.
postconf -e 'proxy_interfaces=wanipgoeshere'
>> your mynetworks have no wan ip, and you have no proxy_interface =
postfix need to have sign of the wan ip in one of them, but not both for
the
On Tue, August 28, 2007 12:26, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> That means that you're greylisting your sasl_authenticated users, which may
> not be desirable (I suppose they are running Outlook and not an MTA).
ups, policyd so need to stop greylistning sasl users
not a config error in postfix
> You
On Tue, August 28, 2007 12:14, Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
> Benny Pedersen escribió:
>> On Tue, August 28, 2007 11:52, Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
>>
>>> I want to use several features (greylisting, throttling...) but,
>>> obviosly, the main problem is I c
On Tue, August 28, 2007 11:52, Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
> I want to use several features (greylisting, throttling...) but,
> obviosly, the main problem is I can test with it if policyd is not
> working fine.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
permit_mynetworks,
reject_unlisted_recipient,
check
On Fri, August 24, 2007 16:55, Stuart Auchterlonie wrote:
> Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> PS: rememember SPF in bind as rr record !
> That should be TXT record.
bind 9.4.x have natively spf as rfc now
Mail::SPF test for SPF and TXT spf records
Mail::SPF::Query just test for TXT records
On Fri, August 24, 2007 16:09, Jim Wright wrote:
> But since SPF is a bad standard and easy to get around by spammers,
> what's the point? Spammers were some of the early adopters of SPF to
> legitimize their mail...
and spamassasssin stopped use high scores on user_in_whitelist_spf for the
sam
On Fri, August 24, 2007 15:32, Cami Sardinha wrote:
> This functionality will not be built into Policyd, there is a different
> policy server which does SPF checking.
so the policy of policyd is to not use anything externaly ?
if yes this will delay pypd public a little more :-)
--
l olso have it, just wait
PS: rememember SPF in bind as rr record !
--
Benny Pedersen
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configu
On Thu, August 23, 2007 17:02, Fernando Schubert wrote:
> smtpd_client_restrictions = reject_rbl_client relays.ordb.org,
ordb.org gone since january
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
-
This SF.net
On Wed, July 25, 2007 20:05, Antonio Querubin wrote:
>> Sure, if I could find out how to make it resolve this within the chroot..
>> Any ideas ?
> Specify the address instead of the hostname for now?
blacklist_dnsname and whitelist_dnsname does not work without working dns
--
This message was
On Wed, July 18, 2007 20:51, Joe Lanager wrote:
> 1. Set SPAMTRAPPING = 1 in policyd.conf
> 2. Set SPAMTRAP_AUTO_EXPIRE=1d in policyd.conf
> 3. Enter the trap address(es) in the spamtrap table in MySQL (e.g.,
_rcpt = [EMAIL PROTECTED] and _active=1)
4.
http://cvs.caudiumforge.n
On Thu, June 21, 2007 12:35, Tim B. wrote:
> If this is already in policyd, then I'm over looking it some how so feel
> free to thwap me upside the head
nope this is still missing
> I'm currently evaluating policyd and other policy servers for a fairly
> busy system. So far I'm working with
On Mon, June 18, 2007 21:47, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> in main.cf:
>
> -->
> smtpd_restriction_classes = greylist
> greylist = check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:10031
>
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> ...
> check_recipient_access hash:/etc/postfix/tables/greylist_domains
> <--
>
>
On Sat, June 16, 2007 18:41, Chris Covington wrote:
> I can call policyd so that a windows result from p0f would greylist
> the host?
for all this to work we need to have opensource windows
p0f is nice, but base greylist on it, newer
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
On Wed, May 23, 2007 13:44, Xavier Beaudouin wrote:
>> I'd like to know what you think of this; how would you handle it?
> Maybe the best thing is to add 213.46.255.22 to whitelist ?
this ip might be load balanced so there is more then one postfix install with
ther e uniq helo name, shame o
On Tue, May 22, 2007 04:33, Eric A. Litman wrote:
> Has anyone played with this idea?
http://policyd.sourceforge.net/readme.html section Greylist training
if you write to new "friends" you need to make sure to retrain greylist,
policyd supports that already, use it more
put your email in the g
On Fri, May 18, 2007 22:51, Thomas Johnson wrote:
> Just a thought, but couldn't you also do this in main.cf:
> defer_code = 451
bingo
> What else would this effect? Any unwelcome side effects?
delivery more pizza :-)
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
---
On Wed, May 9, 2007 23:04, binoy wrote:
> I did send 5 emails. i am just sending small test messages, so i dont
> think size matters here. the triplet table gets updated and the count
> shows 7 at this time. maybe i am doing something silly. any help really
> appreciated.
be awhere that postfix d
On Mon, April 30, 2007 23:11, Jesper Lund wrote:
> I am running postfix 2.4.0, and policyd 1.81
dont ask for help on unreleased software
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
-
This SF.net email is spo
On Mon, April 30, 2007 21:30, Mike DeRosa wrote:
> Does anyone have any idea on why it would show so many of the same header
> Any help would be appreciated
mail is sendt to multi-recipents
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
-
On Tue, April 10, 2007 15:59, Wire James wrote:
> I am new to this list and Policyd. Can you let me know if I can have
> Policyd running on a server that already has Kaspersky Antispam and
> Antivirus operational? They use port 10031.
you can run policyd on 127.0.0.2 and port 10031 and still have
On Mon, March 19, 2007 15:05, Cami wrote:
> The problem is that information is stored in your database.
> Delete it from the throttling table (in MySQL) and all your
> problems will go away.
is the problem with mua that sends size 0 solved ?
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_end_of_d
On Wed, February 28, 2007 19:58, Michael Brennen wrote:
> Thanks for the reply. The object is to avoid sending mail from suspect
> sources through spamassassin in order to keep its load down.
its easy to define them ?
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
On Thu, February 8, 2007 15:50, Bart?omiej Dolata wrote:
> I'm using policyd version 1.80 on a gentoo-linux.
> So far it has worked great.
good, i have done my part on make it work on gentoo
> But I decided to give a network-block option a try.
> I changed config option BLACKLIST_NETBLOCK to 1
>
On Fri, January 12, 2007 16:58, Douglas F. Calvert wrote:
> grep "Helo command rejected" mail.log |cut -f 6 -d : |sort |uniq -c |sort -g
> |tail -2| \
> cut -f 2 -d \[ |cut -f 1 -d \] |xargs someone_elses_handiwork_policyd
> --blacklist
grep 'Helo command' mail.log | cut -d "[" -f 3 | cut -
On Thu, January 11, 2007 21:00, Robert A. Pickering Jr. wrote:
> I wrote a PHP set of scripts that allow certain (authenticated)
> people to add items to the spamlist and blacklist IP. You could
> easily extend it to include whitelisting.
>
> If folks are interested, I'll post them.
post them an
On Fri, January 5, 2007 16:43, Dave Augustus wrote:
> I have a user which gets daily UCE from cmpgnr.com .
>
> With policyd, how would I BLACKLIST this domain and all its subdomains?
blacklist the sender ip then
if thay care about spam :-)
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mail
On Fri, January 5, 2007 16:57, Robert A. Pickering Jr. wrote:
> Unfortunately, there's no way I've found to blacklist a sending
> domain within policyd. You can blacklist IP ranges.
-> Sender Blacklisting format:
INSERT INTO blacklist_sender (_blacklist,_description) \
VALUES ('[EMAIL
blacklist_sender @junc.org
whistlist_dnsname %.junc.org
whitelist_dnsname junc.org
would that not make pretty much what spf does with dns ?
--
This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cas
On Thu, November 16, 2006 11:38, Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães wrote:
> How to solve the ML always-different addresses problems ?? Just
> watch your logs and issue some whitelists to fit them ! I had to do that
whitelist the sender maillist ip in policyd not the maillist Return-Path
that makes s
On Tue, November 7, 2006 16:56, Xavier Beaudouin wrote:
> Hum... Is there any plans to add SPF support and use it to
> autowhitelist some trusted / big mail farms (eg for example
> gmail.com, aol.com, etc...)..
sounds good, just a problematic problem to solve
> Eg : if IP is in the whitelist of
47 matches
Mail list logo
