I have a plugin called regex_helo which can do just this. see:
http://www.thebility.com/qplocal/
You don't have to use all of qplocal, you can just take that one
plugin and use it like any other.
allan
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Christian Herndler
christ...@herndler.com wrote:
Good
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Christian Herndler
christ...@herndler.com wrote:
m. allan noah wrote:
I have a plugin called regex_helo which can do just this. see:
http://www.thebility.com/qplocal/
You don't have to use all of qplocal, you can just take that one
plugin and use it like
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Ask Bjørn Hansen a...@develooper.com wrote:
On Apr 21, 2009, at 10:15, GG Noris wrote:
is possible with the plugin greylisting check, for the remote_ip, only
for the /24 or C class of the IP ( aaa.bbb.ccc )?
Not by default. It shouldn't be too hard to add a
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 2:08 PM, GG Noris g...@pclinx.it wrote:
-Original Message-
From: m. allan noah [mailto:kitno...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 7:51 PM
To: GG Noris; qpsmtpd@perl.org
Subject: Re: greylisting pugin
I assume that you are trying to deal with large
qplocal has several regex-based plugins, one of which might help...
http://www.thebility.com/qplocal/
allan
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:23 AM, Peter Walter pwal...@itlsys.com wrote:
The current check_badmailfrom plugin is somewhat useless for spam control
because it requires literal matches on
There is no benefit to installing. I've been running under xinetd for
a couple of years, directly from an svn checkout in /var/qpsmtpd. In
fact, I dont even make changes inside the checkout, I keep those in
/var/qplocal.
allan
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Hans Salvisberg salvi...@yahoo.de
you would have to hack it to work with your choice of fields in the
dbm, but there is a pruning utility inside the bin dir of my qplocal
suite:
www.thebility.com/qplocal/
allan
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Chris Babcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi everybody.
Does anybody here have any
On Jan 16, 2008 10:25 AM, Charlie Brady
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Hanno Hecker wrote:
There's no real queueing mechanism with the smtp-forward plugin, the
mail will be rejected with a temporary error, which means the mail will
stay in the client's queue and sent later
On 1/14/08, Chris Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Salbinger wrote:
hi,
my greylisting mechanism is blocking too much mails.
not only spam, its blocking web.de and so on.
how can i configure this thing right?
my denysoft_greylist.dbm has 290 ips in it.
am i able to delete
does this not turn your host into a backscatter joe-job spam zombie?
allan
On Dec 7, 2007 9:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
autowhitelist_captcha
http://wiki.qpsmtpd.org/plugins:spam:autowhitelist_captcha
This plug-in is a whitelist which automatically maintains itself
On Dec 7, 2007 12:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This plugin might be able to reject unwanted mail during the original
smtp transaction if it sent a URL back at that time. The origin MTA
would have to pass that on to the user, but then you would not even
need the
On Dec 7, 2007 12:12 PM, John Peacock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
of course you should run all common qpsmtpd anti-spam plug-ins up-
front, like: no_dialup, geo_blacklist_whitelist, check_earlytalker,
and so on. Captcha response mails are only being send to senders
On Dec 3, 2007 3:26 PM, Matt Sergeant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3-Dec-07, at 2:45 PM, Niklas Therning wrote:
I'm writing a qpsmtpd plugin for our custom spam filter. The plugin
reads a couple of custom configuration files at startup. The config
files may change at any time and I would
treshold?
On 9/13/07, Sander Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I've installed qpsmtpd 0.32 using the smtp-forward plugin. I also use
spamassassin 3.2.1 to filter spam with the line 'spamassassin
reject_treshold 10 munge_subject_treshold 6 spamd_socket 127.0.0.1:783
leave_old_headers drop'
i have a plugin regex_rcptto which returns any status you want. not as
nice as reading it from your actual user list, but it works well for
either blocking specific types of addresses (all numbers, etc), or for
allowing a small list. I have also found it useful to block in-house
mailing lists from
On 8/29/07, JT Moree [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given that we are still disagreeing on what is the best way to do it;
Can we use all information used so far to get the most unique possible
for now? Even if it's not perfect, it's a start. Even if some of the
information seems extraneous to some
On 8/29/07, Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if you want to be paranoid, you have to have all 4 data points from
Why is there all this confusion about security ? The goal is to have
a unique MessageID for logs ...
i never said security. i said paranoid, specifically about collisions.
On 8/29/07, Matt Sergeant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29-Aug-07, at 5:50 PM, Charlie Brady wrote:
Except with multiple CPUs is a big problem. OTOH, as has been
mentioned multiple times, a four-tuple identifying the TCP
connection plus a timestamp will be satisfactory with any number of
On 8/28/07, JT Moree [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James W. Abendschan wrote:
The check_earlytalker plugin ensures at least a one
second pause in every SMTP session, so time() + peer IP
+ peer port will be far more unique than a random number :-)
This has been suggested a few times but I'd
On 8/21/07, JT Moree [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JT Moree wrote:
So, I want spamassassin, dnsbl, and maybe rhsbl to skip processing if
they see the whitelist flags. The whitelist_soft plugin uses
or in the case of using the regex_mailfrom plugin I'd have them do
return DECLINED if
On 8/20/07, JT Moree [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin Carr wrote:
But it's very hard to give particular examples that make sense. This is
a particularly bad example, for two reasons:
- most people will NOT want to whitelist senders for relaying because
it's way too easy to forge -
three things spring to mind-
1. the greylisting plugin uses a lock on the dbm file to prevent the
processes from clobbering each other. the GL plugin could be
re-written to use an RDBMS instead, that might help.
2. the greylist db might be huge, i wrote a little script that prunes
the ancient
simple enough to write a plugin that returns OK in hook_mail and
hook_rcpt whenever the sender is valid. how do you know that? do you
have a list?
allan
On 8/15/07, JT Moree [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mean SMTP RCPT, do you, not a plugin?
the config/plugins file has a rcpt_to listed and
On 8/15/07, m. allan noah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
simple enough to write a plugin that returns OK in hook_mail and
hook_rcpt whenever the sender is valid. how do you know that? do you
have a list?
allan
and in fact- attached is just such a plugin. this is a slightly
modified version
yes- its a dick thing to do, and it blocks 90% of my incoming spam :)
i also regex the HELO, the to and the from addys. i do occasionally
have a legit sender who has not setup a proper revdns entry, and lots
of idiot exchange admins with their helo hostname set to
'something.local' instead of a
as mentioned in another thread, i have just published the first
version of a package called qplocal. i would very much like others to
use and provide feedback on the code. i would also like to thank all
the qpsmtpd devels who made this possible (even easy!)
you can view the readme and download
On 6/6/07, Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 17:43 -0700, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
That said, don't use +all as an absolute indicator. There may be
good domains that do a +all too.
This seems to make SPF a complete waste of time. Just block those
domains and force the
On 6/6/07, Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guy Hulbert wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 17:43 -0700, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
That said, don't use +all as an absolute indicator. There may be
good domains that do a +all too.
This seems to make SPF a complete waste of time. Just block those
On 6/6/07, Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 07:47 -0400, m. allan noah wrote:
On 6/6/07, Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 17:43 -0700, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
That said, don't use +all as an absolute indicator. There may be
good domains
On 6/6/07, Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 10:40 -0400, m. allan noah wrote:
[snip]
attached is my spf plugin. it is part of a suite of plugins i call
'qplocal' which i am polishing right now. once i get my web-space
setup, i'll publish a tarball.
Thanks.
The code
i have gotten qpsmtpd polished to the point that i get very little
spam, without using any content-level filtering or any externally
sourced DNSBLs. I am very happy.
what spam i do get falls into two categories, from recently created
free webmail accounts (hotmail/yahoo) or from recently created
On 6/5/07, Meng Weng Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 5, 2007, at 9:35 AM, m. allan noah wrote:
whois seems really slow, and the 'license' on the data seems to
prohibit it, but has anyone found a way to use that info to block
mails until the domain has been around for awhile?
i guess
should be a fairly simple matter to run two queueing plugins, but have
the first one return DECLINED, so that the second one will deliver
normally?
allan
On 5/23/07, JT Moree [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking for an archive plugin. Since we send all mail through
qpsmtpd anyway it seems
On 4/18/07, Mark Farver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Werner Fleck wrote:
I receive a lot of bounces for mail messages which I have not
originally sent. Most of this bounces have the original mail somewhere
in the body. The original mail often contains a Received: line with
one of my domains but
i have just added two issues to google, #12 and #13. the first is a
real bug, which seems to prevent you from using two plugin dirs, and
the second is a helpful additional log message.
thanks
allan
--
The truth is an offense, but not a sin
On 2/26/07, JT Moree [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
m. allan noah wrote:
I have been using greylisting for a little while, and find that
managing the whitelist is sort of annoying. so, i updated my copy of
the plugin to use the query object that the SPF plugin squirrels away.
Is that necessary
i have been running qpsmtpd for a little while now, and love it. but,
i am getting questions from users about missing email. no one is
actually able to point at any specific problem, they are just jumpy
now that there is no spam :) but since i use check_earlytalker and
other plugins that drop
i see a block of code in sender_permitted_from's hook_mail that
manually parses relayclients and morerelayclients. it checks
$self-qp-connection-relay_client() first, so using check_relay
before sender_permitted_from would instead seem to be more
correct.
i wanted to run spf checks on
just started using qpsmtpd with qmail via xinetd. very happy so far.
have found 2 errors in the greylisting plugin:
1. setting db_dir causes taint errors.
2. setting db_dir causes 'invalid parameter(s):' errors
both of these issues are fixed by the attached patch against 0.33-dev
allan---
39 matches
Mail list logo
