On March 24, 2019 12:13:11 AM UTC, Esteban L wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Dovecot 2.2.27
>Postfix 3.1.9
>
>I had SPF setup proper, originally. Then, it stopped working properly
>after some other configuration changes, as I tried to go through and
>eliminate errors.
>
>Here is my header information.
>
>
Hello,
Dovecot 2.2.27
Postfix 3.1.9
I had SPF setup proper, originally. Then, it stopped working properly
after some other configuration changes, as I tried to go through and
eliminate errors.
Here is my header information.
Received-SPF: Temperror (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom;
On 3/23/19 4:53 PM, Peter wrote:
On 24/03/19 05:49, Alice Wonder wrote:
I have gotten then where they displayed throwaway passwords I used
only once for one site (and thus I know that site doesn't hash
passwords and never use it again)
This is not necessarily true. A hashed password can be
On 24/03/19 05:49, Alice Wonder wrote:
I have gotten then where they displayed throwaway passwords I used only
once for one site (and thus I know that site doesn't hash passwords and
never use it again)
This is not necessarily true. A hashed password can be brute-forced.
Peter
Michael Str?der:
> HI!
>
> Could someone please have a look at this RPM patch:
>
> https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/server:mail/postfix/postfix-ssl-release-buffers.patch?expand=1
>
> I'm currently trying to update the RPM to 3.4.4 and I'd like to know
> whether the above makes sense
HI!
Could someone please have a look at this RPM patch:
https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/server:mail/postfix/postfix-ssl-release-buffers.patch?expand=1
I'm currently trying to update the RPM to 3.4.4 and I'd like to know
whether the above makes sense or whether it might even cause
> On Mar 23, 2019, at 3:59 AM, Davide Marchi wrote:
>
> tpd_recipient_restrictions =
>...
>check_policy_service inet:mailstore.example.com:12340
>
>
> I've a doubt: is it correct the space between "[..]service"
> and "inet[..]"?
Yes, that's what should appear in the file.
> I've
Greetings, Christian Schmitz!
> 3)Dear Andrei
>> mmu.ac.ug. 86400 IN TXT "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all"
>> See, ~all was your undoing.
> My domain is **schweb.com.ar** and the email come from **mmu.ac.ug**
> My spf is:
> v=spf1 mx a ip4:24.232.174.73 mx:schweb.com.ar
On 3/22/19 5:54 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 3/22/2019 7:55 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
No. The scareware alerts are generally completely fake. They
are spammed indiscriminately to users the scammer knows nothing
about.
Viktor, that does not agree with my significant experience studying
On 23 Mar 2019, at 11:32, Christian Schmitz wrote:
3)Dear Andrei
mmu.ac.ug. 86400 IN TXT "v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com
~all"
See, ~all was your undoing.
My domain is **schweb.com.ar** and the email come from **mmu.ac.ug**
My spf is:
v=spf1 mx a ip4:24.232.174.73 mx:schweb.com.ar
* Davide Marchi:
> it is suggested to add in "main.cf"
>
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> ...
> check_policy_service inet:mailstore.example.com:12340
Add this using a text editor, keeping leading whitespaces for line
continuation, instead of using postconf in a shell.
See
Wow !! how many answers. First to deep into matter i want give the thanks you
to all. While i was reading (and read all answers)i was taking note of some
items that require my answer o clarification.
1) My topology
1.0)My server is in my office phisically and is located at 1 meter of me (3ft)
Greetings, Christian Schmitz!
> Info extra 1: LOG: /var/log/mail
> connect from mmu.ac.ug[62.75.235.12]
> Anonymous TLS connection established from mmu.ac.ug[62.75.235.12]: TLSv1.2
> with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)
> : SPF softfail (Mechanism '~all' matched):
On Mar 22, 2019, at 7:34 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
They do know the passwords but they didn't hack your PC. See
haveibeenpwned.com. They compromised other services you use and you need
better password management.
On 22.03.19 19:55, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
No. The scareware alerts are
Greetings, Kevin A. McGrail!
> On 3/22/2019 7:55 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
>> No. The scareware alerts are generally completely fake. They
>> are spammed indiscriminately to users the scammer knows nothing
>> about.
>
>
> Viktor, that does not agree with my significant
Hi Friends,
on Debian Stretch, Postfix 3.1.9 and Dovecot 2.2.27 I'm enabling user
quota.
Following this tutorial (suggested from Dovecot mailing list):
https://blog.sys4.de/postfix-dovecot-mailbox-quota-en.html
it is suggested to add in "main.cf"
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
...
On 22 Mar 2019, at 19:45, Bill Cole
wrote:
> Do not accept mail claiming to be from any address in a local domain on the
> port 25 (smtp) smtpd service. Only accept such mail via port 587 (submission)
> and 465 (smtps) services configured to require authentication.
And the way to do this is:
17 matches
Mail list logo