header_checks

I am seeing random spam come in with this consistent type of 'from': (r...@www.cheapquotesonline.com) (r...@chat.biznizpro.com) (r...@safetyaboutonline.net) ..they all begin with 'ret@' and I need some help creating a header_check (and/or body check) to catch this. I tried this, but it didnt wo

header_checks

I am trying to strip some lines from outgoing mail header. It doesn't work for me. I am not sure what I am doing wrong. master.cf -o header_checks=pcre:header_checks.pcre header_checks.pcre /^(.*Received.*192\.168\.12\.7.*)/ IGNORE when I run postmap -q - 'Rece

header_checks

Hi, I've configured Postfix to do header_checks on all incoming mail. The header_checks check if the To: address is one in the header_checks file and then do an action (FILTER in my case) I had to do the filtering this way because I was not able to get 2 content_filtering working the on the

header_checks

Hello all. I'm using postfix since at least 20 years and I could always find a satisfactory solution to my problems. However I have an now an issue with the filtering of the mail headers, as I want to use the headers_check functionality only for e-mails sent to external/Internet addresses. This w

header_checks

Dear list, I am trying to fetch mails with empty Return-Path: mail header with header_checks, but unsucessfully... header_checks=pcre:/etc/postfix/header_checks header_checks: /^Return-Path:\\s+\\/ REJECT Does this format correct? Thanks, Chris __ http://auto.sme.sk

header_checks

header_checks: /^Return-Path:\\s+\\/ REJECT __ http://auto.sme.sk - Všetko o autách (novinky, testy, autosalón, autoškola, porovnaj si auto)

header_checks question

Hello I need help to using header_checks, I create a rule /^Subject:.*hacked*/ DISCARD that work propertly, but a want to know it is posible to email me o to alert me when this rule occur or is aplicated. For some way. Oviusly I see that on the mail.log regards -- Sent from: http://postfix

header_checks question

Can anybody comment on this ugly "fix" for Umlauts in realnames? # Already with Quotes ("=22") thus do nothing /^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?=22(.*)=22\?= <(.*)>$/ REPLACE From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1=22?= <$2> # No quotes /^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?(.*)\?= <(.*)>$/ REPLACE From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1

Re: header_checks

* J.D. Bronson : > I am seeing random spam come in with this consistent type of 'from': > > (r...@www.cheapquotesonline.com) > (r...@chat.biznizpro.com) > (r...@safetyaboutonline.net) With the () around the address? > ..they all begin with 'ret@' and I need some help creating a > header_check (

Re: header_checks

On 05/06/2010 8:12 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: (r...@safetyaboutonline.net) With the () around the address? > ..they all begin with 'ret@' and I need some help creating a > header_check (and/or body check) to catch this. > > I tried this, but it didnt work: > > /^From:.ret@/REJECT unso

Re: header_checks

On Thu, 6 May 2010, J.D. Bronson wrote: I am seeing random spam come in with this consistent type of 'from': (r...@www.cheapquotesonline.com) (r...@chat.biznizpro.com) (r...@safetyaboutonline.net) ..they all begin with 'ret@' and I need some help creating a header_check (and/or body check) to

Re: header_checks

On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 08:02:13AM -0500, J.D. Bronson wrote: > I am seeing random spam come in with this consistent type of 'from': If it's consistent, it's not quite random. :) What other characteristics do these share? I bet there are other ways to block this. > (r...@www.cheapquotesonline.c

Re: header_checks

On 5/6/2010 8:28 AM, Larry Stone wrote: On Thu, 6 May 2010, J.D. Bronson wrote: I am seeing random spam come in with this consistent type of 'from': (r...@www.cheapquotesonline.com) (r...@chat.biznizpro.com) (r...@safetyaboutonline.net) ..they all begin with 'ret@' and I need some help creati

Re: header_checks

J.D. Bronson a écrit : > I am seeing random spam come in with this consistent type of 'from': what is the envelope sender (Return-path)? I used to have a check_sender_access for just that to trigger anti snow shoe spam, but it no more catches anything. more generally, when you ask about how to b

Re: header_checks

Easy fix - we always escape the @ character with a black slash, like ret\@, on several servers where we use regular expressions in postfix header_checks. Jim Logan On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 7:02 AM, J.D. Bronson wrote: > I am seeing random spam come in with this consistent type of 'from&

Re: header_checks

licited email > > Easy fix - we always escape the @ character with a black slash, like > ret\@, on several servers where we use regular expressions in postfix > header_checks. No, this doesn't fix the OP's problem. The @ character is not a regular expression meta character and does not require escaping. Please do not top-post. -- Magnus Bäck mag...@dsek.lth.se

header_checks REJECT

Hello, I am using Postfix 2.7.1. The header_checks manpage says REJECT will insert a default enhanced status code of 5.7.1 if the optional text is not specified. However, the server gives back 450 4.7.1. 220 mail.server.com ESMTP Postfix EHLO hostname 250-mail.server.com 250-PIPELINING 250

Re: header_checks

* Roman Gelfand : > I am trying to strip some lines from outgoing mail header. It doesn't > work for me. I am not sure what I am doing wrong. > > master.cf > > -o header_checks=pcre:header_checks.pcre Where EXACTLY? Details! > header_checks.pcre > >

Re: header_checks

* Roman Gelfand : > I am trying to strip some lines from outgoing mail header. It doesn't > work for me. I am not sure what I am doing wrong. > > master.cf > > -o header_checks=pcre:header_checks.pcre Provide full path to header_checks.pcre. -- All technical questio

Re: header_checks

On 12/27/2010 4:14 PM, Roman Gelfand wrote: I am trying to strip some lines from outgoing mail header. It doesn't work for me. I am not sure what I am doing wrong. master.cf -o header_checks=pcre:header_checks.pcre Your error report is a little light on details... It would be ni

Re: header_checks

On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 04:33:26PM -0600, Noel Jones wrote: >> master.cf >> >> -o header_checks=pcre:header_checks.pcre The file in question is unlikely to be in the "current" directory. This should be: -o header_checks=pcre:${config_directory}/header_checks.pcre -- Viktor.

Re: header_checks

m not sure what I am doing wrong. >> >> master.cf >> >> -o header_checks=pcre:header_checks.pcre > > > Your error report is a little light on details...  It would be nice if you > had mentioned where in master.cf you put this. But never mind. > > The header_ch

header_checks usage

Hi all, I have defined header_checks test. Question why it works if I' testing it locally and doesn't work when I do my test via smtp? this is simple definition in/etc/postfix/ /^Received:/IGNORE !/^To: [0-9]+@/ WARN# any message to non-digital accounts should

header_checks problem

Hello, I previously posted this thread, but changed midstream and was given guidance as to the proper way to post. So, I am starting again. Summary: I would like to ban an address/domain from posting to my system. I am using header_checks to do that. After creating a header_checks file and

Re: header_checks

On 10/20/2011 5:22 AM, Roland de Lepper wrote: > Hi, > > I've configured Postfix to do header_checks on all incoming mail. > The header_checks check if the To: address is one in the > header_checks file and then do an action (FILTER in my case) > > I had to do the fi

Re: header_checks

PM, Noel Jones wrote: > On 10/20/2011 5:22 AM, Roland de Lepper wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I've configured Postfix to do header_checks on all incoming mail. > > The header_checks check if the To: address is one in the > > header_checks file and then do an action

Re: header_checks

On 10/20/2011 7:08 AM, Roland de Lepper wrote: > Hi Noel, > > Sorry, but that is not working. > > The first filter (Disclaimer), caps the message to a tempfile. The > last sendmail command put that file and sends the message back to > the queuemanager. > > I tried all, but doesn't seem to work.

Re: header_checks

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Noel Jones wrote: > On 10/20/2011 7:08 AM, Roland de Lepper wrote: > > Hi Noel, > > > > Sorry, but that is not working. > > > > The first filter (Disclaimer), caps the message to a tempfile. The > > last sendmail command put that file and sends the message back to

Re: header_checks

On 10/20/2011 8:33 AM, Roland de Lepper wrote: > I have a script for adding disclaimers to all outgoing email. (see > disclaimer-script below) > The line, "cat >in.$$ ||", caps the message in a tempfile. the last > sendmail command takes the message and sends it to qmrg. Change the sendmail comma

pcre header_checks

Hi all, I'm new to this list so forgive me if it was already posted here. I'm unsing pcre to filter header_checks, but not all rules are working /^from:.*root@/ REJECT [SN046] is not working log with masked recipients: Search Results*Date**From**to**Delay**Status*Dec 7

header_checks hell

ted: # postmap -q "Subject: SPAM-Verdacht CUSTOMERNAME: Test" pcre:/etc/postfix/header.chk DISCARD SPAM-Verdacht CUSTOMERNAME: Test Postfix has been configured to run header_checks: # postconf -n header_checks header_checks = pcre:$config_directory/header.chk Still my testmails pass t

header_checks issue

I'm trying to accomplish the following: I'm trying to filter e-mail based on the to: field using a regexp header_checks file as follows: /^To: some...@somedomain.com/ FILTER smtp:192.xxx.xxx.xxx I thought with the above expression it would take the e-mail and deliver to the 192.x

header_checks oddities

Hello, Few months ago, I've switched my postfix setup from "regular" greylisting to "milter" greylisting, and it appears to have changed few things about header_checks I didn't notice until yesterday. My setup uses before-queue content filtering: # Before-filter

Re: header_checks

has smtp_header_checks (default: empty) which provide a subset of functionality (for example they cannot change the delivery with redirect, defer, reject, filter, but they can modify content with replace, prepend, ignore, warn). If you need the defer, reject, filter functionality then that requir

Re: header_checks

eck functionality only for e-mails sent > to external/Internet addresses. This without the need of creating a > number of roles depending from the internal sender, IP, ecc as I have > found as hints by googling today (I do support several IPs, domains, ecc). This sounds like what you

Re: header_checks

they can modify content with replace, prepend, ignore, warn). > > If you need the defer, reject, filter functionality then that > requires ordinary header_checks which are available only while > Postfix receives mail. > > Options: > > - Re-implement header_checks with a Milte

Re: header_checks

Marco: > A Milter could be also an option in the future, with the target of > "sanitizing" the mails by replacing the original header with a new one, > ensuring no internal information leakage (i.e. including the > bi-directional mapping of the internal message ID created by the smtp_header_checks

Re: header_checks

Il 29. 10. 15 17:33, Wietse Venema ha scritto: > Marco: >> A Milter could be also an option in the future, with the target of >> "sanitizing" the mails by replacing the original header with a new one, >> ensuring no internal information leakage (i.e. including the >> bi-directional mapping of the

Re: header_checks

Wietse: > smtp_header_checks has a replace option. Marco: > The issue I have is that smtp_header_checks is unable to distinguish > between mail sent to intranet destinations (the VMsrunning the services) > and the Internet. Yes, it can: /etc/postfix/transport: example.com intranet: .examp

Re: header_checks

Il 29. 10. 15 18:09, Wietse Venema ha scritto: > Wietse: >> smtp_header_checks has a replace option. > Marco: >> The issue I have is that smtp_header_checks is unable to distinguish >> between mail sent to intranet destinations (the VMsrunning the services) >> and the Internet. > Yes, it can: > >

Fwd: Header_checks

Hi I have this in my header_checks files: /^From:.*\@ullabulla\.dk/ REDIRECT myem...@ourdomain.dk Thats working fine, but i will like, if mail sent to *@customer.dk is not forwarded to my mail address, but instead is sent to the original recipient. Is that posible to do? Regards Kenneth

header_checks pcre

Hello, I'm having a problem with header_checks pcre This rule is working: # Block mail from xxx.yyy.zzz.www and russian domain if /.*xxx\.yyy\.zzz\.www/ /.*from.*\@.*\.ru.*to.*\@.*/ reject Mail from russian domain endif This is not: # Block mail from xxx.yyy.zzz.www with s

Multiple header_checks?

Quick question that I've not been able to answer. Can I have multiple header_checks directives? I want to split my header_checks files up. Thanks Chris

Re: header_checks

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008, Meno wrote: header_checks: /^Return-Path:\\s+\\/ REJECT I give up? -d

Re: header_checks

Meno wrote: Dear list, I am trying to fetch mails with empty Return-Path: mail header with header_checks, but unsucessfully... what do you mean by fetch? header_checks don't fetch mail. header_checks=pcre:/etc/postfix/header_checks header_checks: /^Return-Path:\\s+\\/ R

Re: header_checks

Meno wrote: The Return-Path is empty in cases when I get a fake mailer-daemon notification from the internet as spam. From MAILER-DAEMON Tue Sep 23 00:10:16 2008 Return-Path: ... Message-Id: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Non Delivery Notification So you're not

Re: header_checks

Meno wrote: - Originálna Správa - Od: mouss Komu: undisclosed-recipients: ; Poslaná: 23.09.2008 14:00 Predmet: Re: header_checks Meno wrote: The Return-Path is empty in cases when I get a fake mailer-daemon notification from the internet as spam. From MAILER-DAEMON Tue Sep

header_checks - transport problem

Hi all, I try to use header_checks to route mails with a specific header through a different SMTP with special TLS options. Therefore I configured a new SMTP service in master.cf:     smtp-sec  unix  -   -   y   -   -   smtp   -o smtp_header_checks=   -o

header_checks and regexes

Hi, Many years ago I picked up a regex pattern that would reject different attachment types, but it no longer seems to match properly. Perhaps someone here can help me with the regex so I don't inadvertently start rejecting mail that I shouldn't? This is what the string that I'd like to reject loo

header_checks UTF8 discard

Hello, i create this rule to block phishing intent /^Subject: =?UTF-8?B?U3UgY3VlbnRhIHNlIGVuY3VlbnRyYSBlbiByZXZpc2nDs24u?=/ DISCARD but not work any ideas? Regards, -- envialosimple.com Emanuel Gonzalez IT / Departamento Emails emanuel.gonza...@donweb.com <

header_checks help, please

Hello, I have been trying to edit the Subject: line using header_checks, without success: header_checks.pcre: if /^From: (.*)<(.+)mydomain\.com\>$/i /^Subject: (.*)$/i REPLACE Subject: some_string $1 endif main.cf: header_checks = pcre:/usr/local/etc/postfix/header_checks.pcre Wou

Re: header_checks question

jmpatagonia: > Hello I need help to using header_checks, I create a rule > > /^Subject:.*hacked*/ DISCARD An alternative is to use HOLD action, assuming you aren't using software that hijacks the HOLD feature for other purposes, such as mailscanner. Then you can review the email

Re: header_checks question

Hello Witse do you mean to use HOLD action on header_checks ? like this ? /^Subject:.*hacked*/ HOLD And that whats suppose to do ? It is holded the email on the queue ? and I can check with mailq command ? and later detele from queue and email me a alert Sorry for ask and not try, because we

Re: header_checks question

On 27.04.20 13:27, Juan Manuel P wrote: Hello Witse do you mean to use HOLD action on header_checks ? like this ? /^Subject:.*hacked*/ HOLD And that whats suppose to do ? if Wietse's message wasn't enough for you, I recommend looking at http://www.postfix.org/header_checks.5.ht

Re: header_checks question

Juan Manuel P: > Hello Witse do you mean to use HOLD action on header_checks ? > > like this ? > > /^Subject:.*hacked*/ HOLD By the way that "*" at the end is useless. > And that whats suppose to do ? > > It is holded the email on the queue ? and I can chec

header_checks vs. content_filter?

ter} -o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=${smtpd_recipient_restrictions_spamfilter} -o cleanup_service_name=cleanup_service . . . cleanup_service unix n - n - 0 cleanup -o header_checks=pcre:/usr/local/etc/postfix/tables/scrub_passthru_headers.pcre ..in master.cf, which is executed

header_checks & body_checks exemptions

Is there a way to exempt postmas...@my.domain, ab...@my.domain and u...@my.domain from header_checks and body_checks while still maintaining the functionality of those checks? -Eric

Re: header_checks question

Zitat von Ralf Hildebrandt : Can anybody comment on this ugly "fix" for Umlauts in realnames? # Already with Quotes ("=22") thus do nothing /^From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22(.*)=22?= <(.*)>$/ REPLACE From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1=22?= <$2> # No quotes /^From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?(.*)?= <(.*)>$/ REPLACE F

Re: header_checks question

* lst_ho...@kwsoft.de : > Not using Outlook as mailclient??? Sorry, I can't even control the internal population, let alone the people sending mail here > More serious, i would be interested too because this happens to us > around twice a month from external senders using Outlook/Exchange... S

Re: header_checks question

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:57:54PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > Can anybody comment on this ugly "fix" for Umlauts in realnames? > > # Already with Quotes ("=22") thus do nothing > /^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?=22(.*)=22\?= <(.*)>$/ REPLACE From: > =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1=22?= <$2> > # No quotes

Re: header_checks question

* Victor Duchovni : > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:57:54PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > > > Can anybody comment on this ugly "fix" for Umlauts in realnames? > > > > # Already with Quotes ("=22") thus do nothing > > /^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?=22(.*)=22\?= <(.*)>$/ REPLACE From: > > =?iso-8859-

Re: header_checks question

Ralf Hildebrandt: > * Victor Duchovni : > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:57:54PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > > > > > Can anybody comment on this ugly "fix" for Umlauts in realnames? > > > > > > # Already with Quotes ("=22") thus do nothing > > > /^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?=22(.*)=22\?= <(.*)>$/

Re: header_checks question

* Wietse Venema : > > But Exchange forgets the "" and just encodes > > L?stn?me, Firstn?me > > instead of > > "L?stn?me, Firstn?me" > > > > thus the quoted-string encapsulation is wrong?! > > RFC822..RFC5322 do not need quotes around text inside the > =?iso-8859-1?Q?stuff?=, as long as there ar

Re: header_checks question

Ralf Hildebrandt: > * Wietse Venema : > > > > But Exchange forgets the "" and just encodes > > > L?stn?me, Firstn?me > > > instead of > > > "L?stn?me, Firstn?me" > > > > > > thus the quoted-string encapsulation is wrong?! > > > > RFC822..RFC5322 do not need quotes around text inside the > > =?i

Re: header_checks question

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 09:26:53PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > > if (space or special characters in realname) >return encode(add_quotes(realname)) > else >return realname > fi No, if you encode, you don't add quotes, quotes are for ASCII data that contains special characters. For n

Re: header_checks question

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:54:47PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: > The rules for display names are in RFC*22. Look for the ABNF for > display-name, phrase, word, and atom. > > Short answer: as long as =?iso-8859-1?Q?stuff?= looks like an > RFC2822 atom, it needs no quoting. And of course, RFC 204

Re: header_checks question

Zitat von Victor Duchovni : On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:54:47PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: The rules for display names are in RFC*22. Look for the ABNF for display-name, phrase, word, and atom. Short answer: as long as =?iso-8859-1?Q?stuff?= looks like an RFC2822 atom, it needs no quoting.

Re: header_checks question

> So the first one is correct and the second one not?? > > From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F6fler=2C_Verena?= > To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27=22H=F6fler=2C_Martin=22=27?= > > This was within one mail from Outlook/Exchange and at least > Thunderbird badly chokes on the first one when answering Same here. T

Re: header_checks question

lst_ho...@kwsoft.de: > Zitat von Victor Duchovni : > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:54:47PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > >> The rules for display names are in RFC*22. Look for the ABNF for > >> display-name, phrase, word, and atom. > >> > >> Short answer: as long as =?iso-8859-1?Q?stuff?= lo

Re: header_checks question

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 03:47:16PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > > So the first one is correct and the second one not?? > > > > From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F6fler=2C_Verena?= > > To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27=22H=F6fler=2C_Martin=22=27?= > > > > This was within one mail from Outlook/Exchange and at lea

Re: header_checks question

Zitat von Victor Duchovni : On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 03:47:16PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > So the first one is correct and the second one not?? > > From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F6fler=2C_Verena?= > To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27=22H=F6fler=2C_Martin=22=27?= > > This was within one mail from Outlook/E

Re: header_checks question

* lst_ho...@kwsoft.de : > The problem is that on some mails sent from Outlook it is not > possible to answer with Thunderbird because the sender address is > split into two invalid mailadresses when doing a reply. This only > happens when there are special chars in the display name but not > every

Re: header_checks question

Zitat von Ralf Hildebrandt : * lst_ho...@kwsoft.de : The problem is that on some mails sent from Outlook it is not possible to answer with Thunderbird because the sender address is split into two invalid mailadresses when doing a reply. This only happens when there are special chars in the dis

Re: header_checks question

lst_ho...@kwsoft.de: > Zitat von Ralf Hildebrandt : > > > * lst_ho...@kwsoft.de : > > > >> The problem is that on some mails sent from Outlook it is not > >> possible to answer with Thunderbird because the sender address is > >> split into two invalid mailadresses when doing a reply. This only > >

Re: header_checks question

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:16:41AM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: >> Same what? Can someone explain the observed issue in some detail? >> All I am seeing is questions about an ill-advised hypothetical solution. >> >> When I put my Cyrillic name into Apple's MUA, the From: header read: >> >>

Re: header_checks question

Zitat von Victor Duchovni : On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:16:41AM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: Same what? Can someone explain the observed issue in some detail? All I am seeing is questions about an ill-advised hypothetical solution. When I put my Cyrillic name into Apple's MUA, the From: h

Re: header_checks question

lst_ho...@kwsoft.de: > > There is no "wrong" To-Header. File a bug-report with Mozilla. > > That's what i tried to find out: Who is at fault and what is the root-case... > If the bug is still present in TB3 i will bother to file a bug. If software X mis-handles a correctly-formatted message heade

Re: header_checks question

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 04:12:05PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: >> There is no "wrong" To-Header. File a bug-report with Mozilla. > > That's what i tried to find out: Who is at fault and what is the > root-case... > If the bug is still present in TB3 i will bother to file a bug. I failed to

Re: header_checks question

Zitat von Victor Duchovni : On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 04:12:05PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: There is no "wrong" To-Header. File a bug-report with Mozilla. That's what i tried to find out: Who is at fault and what is the root-case... If the bug is still present in TB3 i will bother to fi

Re: header_checks REJECT

David Hill: > Hello, > > I am using Postfix 2.7.1. The header_checks manpage says REJECT will > insert a default enhanced status code of 5.7.1 if the optional text is > not specified. However, the server gives back 450 4.7.1. > > 220 mail.server.com ESMTP Postfix &

Re: header_checks REJECT

On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 02:35:22PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > David Hill: > > Hello, > > > > I am using Postfix 2.7.1. The header_checks manpage says REJECT will > > insert a default enhanced status code of 5.7.1 if the optional text is > > not specified. H

Re: header_checks REJECT

On 7/1/2010 2:15 PM, David Hill wrote: On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 02:35:22PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: David Hill: Hello, I am using Postfix 2.7.1. The header_checks manpage says REJECT will insert a default enhanced status code of 5.7.1 if the optional text is not specified. However, the

Re: header_checks REJECT

On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 02:46:19PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote: > On 7/1/2010 2:15 PM, David Hill wrote: > >On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 02:35:22PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > >>David Hill: > >>>Hello, > >>> > >>>I am using Postfix 2.7.1. The header

Re: header_checks REJECT

* David Hill : > soft_bounce = yes turn it off -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de |

Re: header_checks REJECT

AHHH, thanks for that. hidden in my config Sorry for the noise. On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 10:06:29PM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > * David Hill : > > soft_bounce = yes > > turn it off > > -- > Ralf Hildebrandt > Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk > Charité - Universitätsmedizin

Re: header_checks REJECT

Still, shouldn't the logfile show what actually was returned? On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 10:06:29PM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > * David Hill : > > soft_bounce = yes > > turn it off > > -- > Ralf Hildebrandt > Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk > Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin

Re: header_checks REJECT

w what actually was returned? The log shows what was found in the header_checks(5) map. It is presumed that a user who activates soft_bounce understands what effect it will have. -- Offlist mail to this address is discarded unless "/dev/rob0" or "not-spam" is in Subject: header

Issue with header_checks

Hello, I've the following in main.cf header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/regexp_table My postfix release is 2.3.8 I've the following in my header_checks regex table: # MAL FORMATED EMAIL ADDRESS /^From:.*\.@.*/ REJECT "1 - Your Email address is not complia

header_checks: BCC issue

Dear I would like to limit the recipients number in Bcc Header field i have set header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/header_checks content: /^To:([^@]*@){50,}/ REJECT Sorry, your message has too many recepients. /^Cc:([^@]*@){50,}/ REJECT Sorry, your message has too many recepients

header_checks in master.cf?

Is /^From:/ the best? Or maybe /^Date:/ ? Anyhow, my PREPEND is working fine as a header_check in main.cf, but when I put it in master.cf in a smtpd listener that picks up mail from my content filter, it seems to be ignored completely. I read that header_checks won't get certain heade

Re: header_checks usage

On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, taphy wrote: > I have defined header_checks test. Question why it works if I' testing it > locally and doesn't work when I do my test via smtp? Because your tests are misguided and lead you to the wrong conclusion. > this is simple definition in/etc/po

Re: header_checks usage

Hi Sahil, thanks for your reply, it is very much appreciated :) definitely need read manuals more accurate.. (so it is working) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/header_checks-usage-tp24910095p24911219.html Sent from the Postfix mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

header_checks rule skipped

Hi, I would like to tag/replace each message Subject: with some custom pattern and leave the rest unchanged. I'm using following header_checks rule: /^Subject:.*/ REPLACE Subject: PRE $1 but I get a warning: Aug 17 19:03:57 mail postfix/cleanup[20807]: [ID 947731 mail.warning] warning: r

Re: header_checks problem

* Christopher Adams : > Hello, > > I previously posted this thread, but changed midstream and was given > guidance as to the proper way to post. So, I am starting again. > > Summary: I would like to ban an address/domain from posting to my system. I > am using header_ch

Re: header_checks problem

After previously posting a thread about header_checks, someone suggested using check_sender_access, I tried it and posted a follow up and was admonished for changing direction. I specifically asked how to proceed and was told to go back to my original thread, which was header_checks. Message

Re: header_checks problem

* Christopher Adams : > After previously posting a thread about header_checks, someone suggested > using check_sender_access, I tried it and posted a follow up and was > admonished for changing direction. I specifically asked how to proceed and > was told to go back to my original t

Re: header_checks problem

On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 09:00:25PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > * Christopher Adams : > > Summary: I would like to ban an address/domain from posting to > > my system. I am using header_checks to do that. > > Why? Wouldn't check_sender_access be more appropriate?

Re: header_checks problem

/dev/rob0: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 09:00:25PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > > * Christopher Adams : > > > Summary: I would like to ban an address/domain from posting to > > > my system. I am using header_checks to do that. > > > > Why? Wouldn&#x

Re: pcre header_checks

* Marcello Coutinho : > Hi all, > > I'm new to this list so forgive me if it was already posted here. > > I'm unsing pcre to filter header_checks, but not all rules are working > > /^from:.*root@/ REJECT [SN046] is not working Define "not working". W

Re: pcre header_checks

rcello Coutinho : > > Hi all, > > > > I'm new to this list so forgive me if it was already posted here. > > > > I'm unsing pcre to filter header_checks, but not all rules are working > > > > /^from:.*root@/ REJECT [SN046] is not working > > D

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >