On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 12:38:08AM +, Dan Mahoney (Gushi) via Postfix-users
wrote:
> The dayjob is attempting to tie VERP into our ticket system (RT with
> postfix), and it would be useful to encode not just the magic "from"
> address, but ideally the ticket number as well, so that a bounced
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 01:02:36PM -0400, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote:
> > Then you can not use this e-mail address as envelope sender. People
> > will do sender callout and then reject all e-mail with this as sender.
> An option is to have noreply@ delivered to /dev/null. It's valid and a
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 07:47:19AM +0200, Tan Mientras via Postfix-users wrote:
> @Ralph
> Is an automated/unattended email notifying the user about something,
> providing proper ways of contacting. As this email is not read in any way,
> rejecting the mail would be a better way to handle than an
On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 11:24:58AM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
> How about using sender_canoical_maps?
>
> sender_canonical_maps = inline:{
> { double-bou...@mail01.raystedman.ora = double_bou...@raystedman.org } }
>
> Why are you sending these notifications to
On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 12:36:23PM +0100, Matthias Nagel via Postfix-users
wrote:
> I am currently assessing the TLS security of a Postfix mail server and among
> other things sslscan reported that the server allows a (non-EC) DH exchange
> with only 1024 bits. While one solution would be to
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 10:15:53AM +0100, Admin Beckspaced via Postfix-users
wrote:
>
> > somoene is trying to use your postfix as http proxy server.
> > Looks like security scanner.
> do you know the type of encoding?
No, by "CONNECT", which is no SMTP command, but a HTTP one.
Bastian
--
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Szymon Malinowski via Postfix-users
wrote:
> You see the point? We got stuck in a loop of sending DMARC reports which are
> beeing bounced because of unknown user.
> Is there any way to prevent such situations?
Don't send failure reports, ever. At least
On Sat, Aug 12, 2023 at 09:47:57AM -0400, pgnd via Postfix-users wrote:
> postconf -n | grep -i tls | grep -i cipher
> smtp_tls_ciphers = medium
> smtp_tls_exclude_ciphers = EXP, LOW, MEDIUM, aNULL, eNULL, SRP,
> PSK, kDH, DH, kRSA, DHE, DSS, RC4, DES, IDEA,
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 11:23:53PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
wrote:
> > #systemctl status postfix
> > ? postfix.service - Postfix Mail Transport Agent
> > Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service; enabled; preset:
> > e>
> > Active: active (exited) since Wed
On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 10:21:47AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via
Postfix-users wrote:
> I've read a trick to reject particular recipient with temporary failure,
> which results in mail for other recipient being accepted, and further retry
> from sending server should only include that
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 09:44:41AM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
> Looks like you have a *local* DNS problem. Check your routing,
> including netmasks.
The domain is broken. See
https://dnsviz.net/d/info.apr.gov.rs/dnssec/
On of the listed name servers is unresponsive and also
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 07:32:55PM +0300, Eugene R via Postfix-users wrote:
> Am I correct that the string in question should normally contain the SASL
> response? While the "Password:" is apparently some interactive prompt,
> indicating that something might be wrong with the connection or
>
12 matches
Mail list logo
