Switch to DuckDuckGo Search
   February 25, 2012  
< | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | >

Toggle Join/Part | bottom
[00:01:26] *** sphenxes has quit IRC
[00:05:57] *** TheLittleOne has quit IRC
[00:07:41] *** ced117 has quit IRC
[00:17:02] *** jkfod has quit IRC
[00:20:10] *** nutron has quit IRC
[00:26:28] *** rhett has left #postfix
[00:28:54] <tmberg> 0796B1AA0B4: dk_eom(): resource unavailable: BIO_new_mem_buf() failed <-- That is how dk-filter "punish" you. :P
[00:29:18] <jimpop> why are you still using DomainKeys?
[00:29:25] <jimpop> upgrade to dkim-filter
[00:32:08] *** penrod has quit IRC
[00:32:34] <tmberg> I use em both.
[00:33:14] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[00:33:52] <tmberg> I like the warm fuzzy feeling when mailverifiers/yahoo and such gives me the word "pass". :D
[00:35:31] *** anigma has quit IRC
[00:36:35] *** anigma has joined #postfix
[00:36:35] *** anigma has joined #postfix
[00:38:20] <tmberg> And its only about.me mail that causes it.
[00:38:52] *** hever has quit IRC
[00:41:07] *** MAAAAAD has quit IRC
[00:41:26] *** MAAAAAD has joined #postfix
[00:41:45] *** penrod has quit IRC
[00:43:18] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[00:48:13] *** higuita has quit IRC
[01:09:05] *** robin_k has joined #postfix
[01:09:46] <robin_k> Hi all.
[01:11:08] <tmberg> El0.
[01:11:25] <robin_k> OK, just a quick and dirty question :-) I'm running Debian Squeeze and would like to setup my own mail server using Postfix and all other packages related to Mail (dovecot, SASLAuth, etc), but I honestly don't know a whole lot about how to set everything up so it'll all work together.
[01:12:49] <robin_k> I don't need a huge setup for like hundreds of domains and users, the thing is supposed to receive mail for like 2 − 4 domains and about as many users. Is there any recommended tutorial on how to set things up and end up with a stable, reliable system?
[01:15:02] <tmberg> robin_k: http://flurdy.com/docs/postfix/
[01:19:06] <robin_k> tmberg Ah, many thanks! I'll give this a try :-)
[01:19:23] *** robin_k has left #postfix
[01:23:31] *** master_of_master has quit IRC
[01:25:01] *** master_of_master has joined #postfix
[01:27:55] *** e-anima has quit IRC
[01:28:50] *** d3c has quit IRC
[01:34:46] <Guest61240> rob0: redmail might be of interest
[01:35:01] <Guest61240> http://redmail.com/
[01:35:08] *** wdp has quit IRC
[01:35:22] <Guest61240> oops
[01:37:19] *** fawkingijit has quit IRC
[01:37:58] *** anonymous has joined #postfix
[01:38:23] *** anonymous is now known as Guest11002
[01:50:16] *** Guest61240 has left #postfix
[01:52:11] *** sahil has quit IRC
[01:52:12] *** sahil has joined #postfix
[02:06:35] *** p3rror has quit IRC
[02:19:49] *** p3rror has joined #postfix
[02:22:55] *** chalcedony has quit IRC
[02:24:35] *** acidrain has quit IRC
[02:24:55] *** acidrain has joined #postfix
[02:31:35] *** TheLittleOne has joined #postfix
[02:32:16] *** TheLittleOne has quit IRC
[02:42:52] <jimpop> soo... who else here has a mime_header_check rule like such:
[02:42:55] <jimpop> /name=[^>]*\.(bat|com|exe|dll|vbs)/ REJECT
[02:46:07] <Patrickdk> me me :)
[02:49:06] <jimpop> today i discovered that blocks some mail from Google's DMARC team where name="google.com!DOMAIN.LTD!1329523200!1329609599.zip"
[02:49:11] <jimpop> which makes sense
[02:49:22] <Patrickdk> heh?
[02:49:28] <Patrickdk> how does it block it?
[02:49:35] <Patrickdk> oh heh, your rule is too too simple
[02:49:35] <jimpop> .con
[02:49:38] <jimpop> *.com
[02:50:26] <jimpop> iirc, i didn't end it with a $ because of inconsistencies with Content-Type: trailing spaces
[02:50:46] <jimpop> OR possibly there was an old vulnerability that padded spaces to a file name
[02:51:03] <jimpop> I'm trying to recall the history on that
[02:51:45] <Patrickdk> /^Content-(Disposition|Type):\s+.+?(?:file)?name="?.+?\.(bat|exe|dll|vbs)\b/ REJECT
[02:51:58] <Patrickdk> I'm not blocking .com
[02:52:24] <jimpop> is .com even a valid Windows extention any more?
[02:52:38] <Patrickdk> it never was
[02:52:43] <Patrickdk> it was only ever a dos thing
[02:52:54] <jimpop> it was back in Win95 days
[02:53:05] <Patrickdk> win95 didn't use .com
[02:53:22] *** chalced has joined #postfix
[02:54:14] <jimpop> i'm pretty sure it did. but googling that is futile
[02:54:52] <jimpop> oh yeah
[02:55:06] <jimpop> wikipedia.org/wiki/COM_file
[02:55:28] <jimpop> "Malicious usage of the .com extension"
[02:55:48] <Patrickdk> oh ya, wikipedia is the authorative source of all info
[02:56:04] <jimpop> well, it confirms my recollections
[02:56:11] <jimpop> so it must be right.
[02:56:14] <jimpop> ;-)
[02:57:00] <Patrickdk> I don't see anything in there
[02:57:09] <Patrickdk> no one said a .com couldn't be a virus
[02:57:16] <jimpop> true
[02:57:21] <Patrickdk> just that windows has always needed exe files
[02:57:29] <Patrickdk> but it still maintains .com dos compatability
[02:57:37] <jimpop> but .com took precedence over .exe in execution order
[02:57:47] <Patrickdk> way way back in the day
[02:57:50] <jimpop> even on win95 and then some
[02:58:02] <jimpop> not the use of Microsoft Windows, not DOS
[02:58:37] <jimpop> *note
[02:59:01] <Patrickdk> well, win95/98 was a bastardized dos/windows merge
[02:59:31] <jimpop> i'd bet that Windows 7 still launches a test.com file.
[02:59:43] <Patrickdk> I'm sure it will
[02:59:58] <Patrickdk> but you can't write a windows application in a .com file
[03:00:20] <jimpop> i think you can
[03:00:26] <jimpop> same interpreter
[03:01:30] <jimpop> diff format btwn .exe and .com... but the Windows kernel didn't look at the extention to determine how to process. The extenstion was used for invocation.
[03:01:52] * jimpop needs an irc spellchecker
[03:02:14] *** penrod has quit IRC
[03:02:39] <Patrickdk> actually they do run differently
[03:02:57] <Patrickdk> atleast when I was writing win95 programs they did
[03:03:07] <jimpop> they run differently, but they are invoked the same way
[03:03:14] <Patrickdk> not saying you can't totally hack the system, and might be able to get a gui in a .com
[03:03:15] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[03:03:27] <Patrickdk> but a gui in less than 64k alone won't be easy :)
[03:03:53] <jimpop> the kernel doesn't invoke files, it just executes them. Explorer/Exchange/Outlook/IE invoke files and tickle the kernel to execute.
[03:04:21] <Patrickdk> no, they are executed in different contexts
[03:04:40] <jimpop> you can certainly get a virus in a .com file and have Windows execute it as an executable
[03:04:54] <Patrickdk> didn't say you couldn't
[03:05:05] <Patrickdk> but windows executes a dos exe, a windows exe and a com differently
[03:05:21] <jimpop> you can copy test.exe to test.com and Windows will execute it the same
[03:05:24] <Patrickdk> same way it executes 32 and 64bit differently
[03:05:46] <Patrickdk> yes, windows doesn't ID it on the extention
[03:05:49] <Patrickdk> no sane person would
[03:06:08] <jimpop> i could rename iexplore.exe to iexplore.com and not have any problems other than existing file associations
[03:06:22] <Patrickdk> yes, cause it sees it's an exe file, and runs it as such
[03:06:27] <Patrickdk> it ignores the .com extention
[03:06:48] <Patrickdk> even dos supported that
[03:06:51] <jimpop> so i could put 5megs of virus into runme.com and attach it to an email sent to Outlook2003 and ...well you know the rest
[03:07:08] <Patrickdk> sure, but I would still call that an exe :)
[03:07:20] <jimpop> but your mime_check would miss it
[03:07:31] <Patrickdk> good thing I don't depend on it for my safety
[03:07:46] * jimpop pages up to capture Patrickdk's line about not needing to check for .com files
[03:07:54] <jimpop> ;-)
[03:08:02] <Patrickdk> I'm sure I don't use only one type of check
[03:08:15] <Patrickdk> that is just a quick simple check
[03:08:50] <Patrickdk> I forget why I disabled .com checking
[03:08:54] <Patrickdk> I was having some issue with it
[03:22:30] *** penrod has quit IRC
[03:23:15] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[03:37:24] *** penrod has quit IRC
[03:38:17] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[03:39:14] <jimpop> Patrickdk: can you verify that regex you posted, I get postfix/cleanup[20931]: warning: regexp map /etc/postfix/mime_header_checks, line 1: Invalid preceding regular expression
[03:42:07] <Patrickdk> pcre?
[03:42:28] <jimpop> doh
[03:43:07] <jimpop> it's set as regexp:/etc/postfix/mime_header_checks
[03:43:15] <Patrickdk> not going work
[03:43:22] <Patrickdk> the one I posted was a pcre line
[03:43:29] <jimpop> i'll change it to pcre:
[03:43:31] <Patrickdk> cause of the \s \b ...
[03:43:31] <jimpop> thx
[03:48:19] *** xxzz has joined #postfix
[04:18:42] *** higuita has joined #postfix
[04:24:04] *** jarr0dsz has quit IRC
[04:24:14] *** jarr0dsz has joined #postfix
[04:31:25] *** saftsack__ has joined #postfix
[04:32:48] *** saftsack has quit IRC
[04:34:04] *** abyss has quit IRC
[04:42:10] *** abyss has joined #postfix
[05:02:30] *** penrod has quit IRC
[05:03:15] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[05:10:20] *** codin_ has joined #postfix
[05:10:46] *** rob0_ has joined #postfix
[05:13:18] *** MAAAAAD has quit IRC
[05:13:18] *** rob0 has quit IRC
[05:13:18] *** codin has quit IRC
[05:16:04] *** MAAAAAD has joined #postfix
[05:24:37] *** skopii has quit IRC
[05:25:03] *** skopii has joined #postfix
[05:26:15] *** p3rror has quit IRC
[05:29:17] *** xxzz has quit IRC
[05:31:08] *** n0sq has joined #postfix
[05:31:46] *** cilly has quit IRC
[05:31:55] *** bca has quit IRC
[05:32:15] *** benteaa has joined #postfix
[05:32:16] *** benteaa is now known as bca
[05:44:54] *** penrod has quit IRC
[05:45:19] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[05:50:28] *** majuscule has quit IRC
[05:59:09] *** MAAAAD has joined #postfix
[06:02:06] *** MAAAAAD has quit IRC
[06:08:28] *** acidrain has quit IRC
[06:09:39] *** n0sq has quit IRC
[06:12:09] *** acidrain has joined #postfix
[06:19:23] *** m1nish has joined #postfix
[06:26:50] *** penrod has quit IRC
[06:28:14] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[07:00:34] *** xxzz has joined #postfix
[07:23:09] *** Bry8Star has quit IRC
[07:24:43] *** Bry8Star has joined #postfix
[07:41:37] *** gerhard7 has joined #postfix
[08:14:56] *** ciklid has joined #postfix
[08:18:21] *** p3rror has joined #postfix
[08:19:15] *** stpvoice has quit IRC
[08:28:17] *** stpvoice has joined #postfix
[09:04:06] *** Liquido_ has quit IRC
[09:22:51] *** cmatheson has joined #postfix
[09:23:41] *** cmatheson has quit IRC
[09:24:49] *** cmatheson has joined #postfix
[09:26:33] *** cmatheson has quit IRC
[09:29:34] *** feisar has joined #postfix
[09:31:02] *** bubo has joined #postfix
[09:34:16] *** pascal has joined #postfix
[09:34:17] *** jarr0dsz has quit IRC
[09:36:42] *** sphenxes has joined #postfix
[09:52:38] *** ced117 has joined #postfix
[10:00:06] *** penrod has quit IRC
[10:00:58] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[10:06:29] *** bubo has quit IRC
[10:06:30] *** Motoko has quit IRC
[10:11:50] *** d3c has joined #postfix
[10:14:01] *** penrod has quit IRC
[10:15:57] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[10:30:21] *** penrod has quit IRC
[10:30:59] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[10:44:25] *** chadmaynard has joined #postfix
[10:50:06] *** penrod has quit IRC
[10:50:56] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[11:09:08] *** cdiff has joined #postfix
[11:09:56] *** penrod has quit IRC
[11:11:02] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[11:15:44] *** wdp has joined #postfix
[11:24:52] *** penrod has quit IRC
[11:25:58] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[11:28:22] *** cdiff has quit IRC
[11:48:46] *** khildin has joined #postfix
[11:49:52] *** gerhard7 has quit IRC
[11:49:58] <khildin> good morning... I have a small Q: Does postfix have a hard mailbox size limit else than the volumesize the mailboxes are stored??
[11:51:33] *** poli has quit IRC
[11:52:31] *** poli has joined #postfix
[11:53:18] *** acidrain has quit IRC
[11:54:06] *** acidrain has joined #postfix
[12:02:29] *** morse has quit IRC
[12:08:45] <atossava> khildin: no. There is a default mailbox_size_limit (see postconf mailbox_size_limit) but that's arbitrary
[12:10:03] <khildin> atossava: thnx... I am aware of mailbox_size_limit and mail_size_limit... but I was wondering if there was a hard limit.. (excluding max storage size of the diskdrive the mailbox is stored on)
[12:10:57] <khildin> this because some less open MTA's do have a hard limit... (also why you don't want to use propiatary software... ^^^)
[12:16:38] *** jpr5 has quit IRC
[12:16:55] *** e-anima has joined #postfix
[12:18:52] <atossava> khildin: not that I know. however, rest assured that multi-gigabyte mailboxes are a poor idea regardless of the environment :D
[12:19:58] *** cps0 has joined #postfix
[12:21:37] <khildin> atossava: I just wanted to know if it was possible... I _will_ use the mailbox_size_limit option to set a limit.. :)
[12:21:53] <khildin> thnx for the info
[12:23:02] <atossava> np
[12:23:07] <atossava> the default is about 50MB
[12:23:27] <khildin> yes... and default mailsize is 10MB...
[12:23:57] <khildin> or was it 20?... anyway.. something in that area... ^^
[12:24:38] *** ciklid has quit IRC
[12:29:16] *** penrod has quit IRC
[12:30:58] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[12:39:51] *** penrod has quit IRC
[12:41:00] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[13:12:46] *** xxzz has quit IRC
[13:16:38] *** sfrancis has joined #postfix
[13:25:40] *** morse has joined #postfix
[13:29:33] *** niki has joined #postfix
[13:39:13] *** khildin has quit IRC
[13:56:36] *** zastaph has joined #postfix
[13:59:38] *** penrod has quit IRC
[14:00:09] *** SelfishMan has quit IRC
[14:00:41] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[14:32:04] *** jkfod has joined #postfix
[14:33:29] *** penrod has quit IRC
[14:36:47] *** jkfod has quit IRC
[14:37:08] *** gerhard7 has joined #postfix
[14:40:25] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[14:41:35] *** shal3r has quit IRC
[14:41:50] *** Toerkeium has quit IRC
[14:43:41] *** milligan has quit IRC
[14:43:47] *** viezerd has quit IRC
[14:44:22] *** milligan has joined #postfix
[14:44:55] *** viezerd has joined #postfix
[14:52:05] *** Graungaard has joined #postfix
[15:07:58] *** jra has joined #postfix
[15:26:38] *** gerhard7 has quit IRC
[15:34:26] *** penrod has quit IRC
[15:35:40] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[15:59:58] *** dragoon2k has joined #postfix
[16:04:35] *** penrod has quit IRC
[16:05:40] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[16:12:42] *** jra has quit IRC
[16:34:38] *** dragoon2k has left #postfix
[16:49:42] *** penrod has quit IRC
[16:50:39] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[16:55:06] *** penrod has quit IRC
[16:55:39] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[17:07:26] *** bool has joined #postfix
[17:08:14] *** rob0_ is now known as rob0
[17:09:06] <bool> Hello.. I am making a access map-file. Is it possible to use variables inside the maps.. eg: "default_msg = This is a error message"\n "some at email dot com 554 $default_msg" ?
[17:13:53] *** seekwill has joined #postfix
[17:26:55] *** MaximusColourum has joined #postfix
[17:29:54] *** gerhard7 has joined #postfix
[17:31:01] <adaptr> !tell bool database
[17:31:02] <knoba> bool: "database" : http://www.postfix.org/DATABASE_README.html provides an overview of how Postfix lookup tables work, and the various types that are implemented.
[17:44:32] *** seekwill has quit IRC
[17:46:58] *** seekwill has joined #postfix
[17:47:38] *** zastaph has quit IRC
[17:49:37] *** nowthatsamatt has joined #postfix
[17:49:58] *** nowthatsamatt has left #postfix
[17:57:14] *** krzee has quit IRC
[18:02:28] *** snearch has joined #postfix
[18:19:46] *** penrod has quit IRC
[18:20:38] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[18:23:35] *** d3c has quit IRC
[18:25:01] *** MaximusColourum has quit IRC
[18:26:15] *** stpvoice has quit IRC
[18:30:05] *** stpvoice has joined #postfix
[18:36:03] *** crane has joined #postfix
[18:40:41] *** gerhard7 has quit IRC
[18:44:03] *** penrod has quit IRC
[18:44:27] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[18:46:06] *** crane has quit IRC
[18:50:20] <bool> correct me if i'm wrong.. smtpd_recepient_restrictions is checked when a remote client tries to send an e-mail to my postfix server and relayhost is when someone tries to send an outgoing message from my server?
[18:52:53] <abbe> yeah, after 'RCPT TO' command
[18:54:13] <bool> thanks :)
[18:55:15] <bool> and what is the difference between putting an address inside a map with check_client_access and using reject_rbl_client?
[18:55:45] <acidrain> im about to throw my comp if it doesnt relay a damn email
[18:56:04] <seekwill> Throw it my way!
[18:56:22] <rob0> reject_* restrictions only reject; access(5) maps have many more choices.
[18:56:53] <bool> rob0, but as long as i use REJECT as action in my map it would be the same? right?
[18:57:53] *** mBull has joined #postfix
[18:58:27] *** crane has joined #postfix
[18:59:10] <crane> can somebody explain me why my existing recipient is running into the rule reject_unverified_recipient if i'm trying to send an email from external but not if i send one from local?
[19:00:45] *** cps0 has quit IRC
[19:00:55] <rob0> !reject_unverified_recipient
[19:00:55] <knoba> rob0: "reject_unverified_recipient" : An smtpd(8) restriction which probes a recipient address by using RCPT TO and QUIT. No actual message is sent. See http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_VERIFICATION_README.html#recipient
[19:01:26] <rob0> ... and rejects if that probe fails for any reason.
[19:02:02] <crane> but how is that possible?
[19:02:09] <crane> i've got two recipients
[19:02:19] <crane> admin at domain dot tdl and info at domain dot tdl
[19:02:31] <crane> info works perfectly from extern and locla
[19:02:38] <crane> but admin works only on local
[19:02:48] <rob0> I suppose if one of them fails, it is rejected.
[19:03:30] <crane> the main question is why does it fails?
[19:03:50] <crane> i'm sending from the same server to both recipients and only this one gets rejected
[19:04:01] <rob0> For any one of 7.3 gazillion possible reasons.
[19:04:09] <crane> ^^
[19:04:13] <crane> i love it :D
[19:04:40] * rob0 thumps on the stupid magical crystal ball, piece of junk :(
[19:09:43] <crane> wait a few seconds... i will paste you a logdump
[19:09:47] <Rovanion> I'm having issues sending and reciving emails from other domains, local works dandy fine. Here's a paste with the mail.log: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/556590/ . The NOQUEUE is when sending and the smtp connect from google is reciving.
[19:12:15] <rob0> !tell Rovanion chroot
[19:12:16] <knoba> Rovanion: "chroot" : The fifth column in master.cf, if not n , means that the Postfix process described on that line runs in a chroot, see !debug , !queue_directory and files in the examples/chroot-setup subdirectory of the Postfix source archive which show examples of a Postfix chroot environment on a variety of systems
[19:12:27] <crane> rob0, here we go: http://pastebin.com/hS5A2zrk
[19:12:34] <rob0> looks like broken name resolution if you cannot resolve gmail.com
[19:13:08] <rob0> Rovanion, also, I have no idea what you are doing with smtps nor why you would want to.
[19:13:25] <rob0> and all those "imap" logs are useless
[19:13:51] <Rovanion> rob0: Yes that about imap is just me connecting via roundcube.
[19:15:06] <rob0> crane, "mail transport unavailable" probably means you did something silly with transport_maps or other transport(5) settings.
[19:15:27] <Rovanion> rob0: My setup doesn't use chroot. will check if I got some setting wrong in master.
[19:16:36] <crane> that would be correct if other users couldn't get any mails... but thats possible...
[19:17:32] *** uqlev has joined #postfix
[19:17:38] *** gerhard7 has joined #postfix
[19:18:06] *** uqlev has quit IRC
[19:18:43] *** uqlev has joined #postfix
[19:20:00] *** wdp_ has joined #postfix
[19:22:48] *** MAAAAD has quit IRC
[19:26:15] <Rovanion> rob0: Thank you, i did have a n too little in my config. Now what were you saying about smtps: When I comment out my settings for submission in master.cf I get errors sending.
[19:27:13] *** bpb_grinda has joined #postfix
[19:27:25] <bpb_grinda> hi. can someone help me with this error: postfix/postdrop[3711]: warning: mail_queue_enter: create file maildrop/609115.3711: Disk quota exceeded
[19:31:31] *** m1nish has quit IRC
[19:31:39] *** acidrain has quit IRC
[19:31:40] *** _znull is now known as z
[19:32:10] *** z is now known as Guest51924
[19:32:49] <rob0> bpb_grinda, apparently you have set disk quotas on the /var filesystem, and the postfix user has exceeded them.
[19:33:31] *** mBull has quit IRC
[19:33:37] <rob0> Rovanion, still failed to answer what you are doing with smtps and why you think you want it.
[19:34:00] *** MAAAAD has joined #postfix
[19:34:07] <bpb_grinda> the thing is i havent set any quota and my disk is 23% full
[19:34:08] <Rovanion> rob0: I have no bloody idea why I want it over smtp now that I think of it.
[19:34:46] <Rovanion> rob0: Because it's just encrypted between me and my relay, correct?
[19:36:21] <rob0> !smtps
[19:36:21] <knoba> rob0: "smtps" : Port 465 is smtps, SMTP over SSL, a deprecated means of submission. This means that smtps should *not* be used, and that this factoid exists for historical purposes only and should not be implemented. See !submission for smtps' successor. That being said, Postfix can implement smtps with a separate smtpd(8) listener with \"-o smtpd_tls_wrappermode=yes\". See the commented example in master.cf.
[19:36:27] <rob0> !tls
[19:36:28] <knoba> rob0: "tls" : Transport Layer Security (RFC2246). Previously known as SSL, TLS adds a layer of encryption to protocols such as SMTP, submission, IMAP or POP3 to improve security during transmission over the Internet. TLS is implemented using the STARTTLS method, while the non-standard wrapper style of implementation is deprecated at this point. See http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html for more info.
[19:42:58] *** gerhard7 has quit IRC
[19:43:22] *** gerhard7 has joined #postfix
[19:49:52] *** penrod has quit IRC
[19:50:40] *** penrod has joined #postfix
[19:58:59] *** phantasm66 has joined #postfix
[20:02:49] <seekwill> rob0: How would you design the "ultimate" antispam/IP reputation system, at a high level (i.e., business requirements and not technology specific)
[20:03:37] *** bpb_grinda has left #postfix
[20:04:12] <rob0> seekwill, in a thousand words or less? :)
[20:04:52] <seekwill> Anything. Like, if you had full control of every single step
[20:05:58] <seekwill> Do you have a write up? Wiki?
[20:06:10] <rob0> hmm, maybe I should
[20:06:37] <seekwill> I'm talking like in-line content filtering, adding weights based on various conditions, etc. But not tied to any specific technology
[20:06:44] <rob0> I started on something for my smtpd_reject_footer URL, never really finished it.
[20:07:06] <seekwill> So not worrying about pros/cons of Postfix, Spamassassin, Dspam, Zen RBL,etc
[20:07:55] *** stpvoice has quit IRC
[20:08:32] <seekwill> oh yeah
[20:08:34] <seekwill> Like that!
[20:09:06] <rob0> Spamhaus has an "effective filtering" white paper which is pretty good.
[20:09:07] <seekwill> "Your message was rejected as spam. If this is in error, please visit http://domain.com/notspam?id=1239jkfdjkfds"
[20:09:44] <seekwill> Yeah, but I wanted YOUR opinion :)
[20:10:56] <rob0> All my experience being in Postfix, my opinions tend to be Postfixated in certain technologies.
[20:11:15] <rob0> such as, postscreen as layer 1
[20:12:06] <seekwill> At some point, you'll need to be a pioneer and not just a follower :) Push Postfix to evolve with the changing spam scene
[20:12:27] <rob0> helo checks, dnsbls, sender/client/helo rhsbls, next
[20:12:45] <rob0> I have been thinking about the transition to IPv6
[20:15:33] <rob0> and ISTM that a good feature we don't have yet would be to differentiate ipv4/6 in one instance.
[20:16:53] <rob0> IPv6 should start out as default deny, because the DNSBL technology which [almost] brought spam under control won't translate well to v6.
[20:17:24] <seekwill> pre-DATA is starting to show its ineffectiveness
[20:19:11] <rob0> I know what you mean, but there too, receivers can always block the large senders who fail to rein in their abusers. Granted, that can seriously hurt the usability of email, but it is an option they have.
[20:19:23] <seekwill> Are we going to settle that compromised webmail accounts will solely have to rely on content filtering?
[20:20:19] <rob0> nope, when abuse exceeds a certain threshold, we block the lazy and incompetent webmail providers.
[20:21:22] <rob0> pre-queue content filtering will have to become the standard, too
[20:22:28] <seekwill> I wouldn't call it lazy or incompetent. There are a lot of considerations to take into account
[20:22:43] *** p3rror has quit IRC
[20:22:53] <seekwill> There's always abuse when it comes to "free" stuff
[20:23:02] *** gerhard7 has quit IRC
[20:23:16] <seekwill> Overhead, budgets, etc.
[20:24:34] <rob0> spammers are all about cost shifting, and they're again shifting their costs.
[20:24:56] <seekwill> Spammers do it for the money :)
[20:29:34] <bool> would it be wise to list the same access file for both check_client_access and check_sender_access?
[20:29:38] <uqlev> seekwill, are you doing it for charity?
[20:30:23] <seekwill> uqlev: No, for the sake of email communication :)
[20:30:49] <rob0> bool, typically not, as the lookups are not always the same. But you can in some cases.
[20:31:29] <bool> rob0, what harm could it do?
[20:32:32] <seekwill> uqlev: Spammers are moving towards using compromised webmail accounts, due to the effectiveness of RBLs and pre-data checks.
[20:34:00] <uqlev> seekwill, you mean Yahoo, hotmail etc?
[20:34:07] <seekwill> Yeah
[20:34:19] <seekwill> (and other accounts as well too)
[20:34:37] <seekwill> Blocking Yahoo and Hotmail isn't really an option :)
[20:34:48] <uqlev> seekwill, I agree
[20:35:05] <seekwill> So what are we to do?
[20:36:03] <uqlev> seekwill, it depends on a size of your server. Small server is a way easier to protect that that with 100+ accounts
[20:36:48] <seekwill> It depends.
[20:37:18] <uqlev> seekwill, I guess minimization of mailserver for 1 or 2 domains for every working group is better solution
[20:38:01] *** p3rror has joined #postfix
[20:38:24] <seekwill> A smaller volume server will have a lower spam accuracy percentage
[20:38:41] <seekwill> Higher volume servers will see more, detect it better, and block more
[20:38:53] <uqlev> seekwill, you mean content filtering
[20:38:59] *** snearch has quit IRC
[20:39:01] <seekwill> No, everything
[20:39:23] <uqlev> seekwill, I am not agree for everything
[20:39:24] <seekwill> Do you use an RBL or did you create your own?
[20:40:08] <uqlev> seekwill, for smaller server you can implicate finest adjusted RBL
[20:40:22] <seekwill> But you'll always be reactive
[20:40:34] <seekwill> And not proactively block IPs you've never seen before
[20:40:35] <uqlev> seekwill, I use both public RBL and my private
[20:41:02] <seekwill> And as rob0 mentioned, the introduction of IPv6 is going to make RBLs a lot harder
[20:41:07] <uqlev> I do proactively block unknown IPs but temporarily
[20:41:24] <seekwill> That is bad, in my opinion
[20:41:52] <seekwill> That ruins user experience
[20:41:53] <uqlev> not that bad from my 6 years experience of implication private white-lists
[20:42:14] <rob0> And maybe a public DNSWL for v6
[20:42:14] <seekwill> We don't need to get all personal now :)
[20:42:37] <uqlev> I would not rely on public WL
[20:43:41] <rob0> A public DNSWL that wants to be taken seriously will be much like public DNSBLs with the same desire. They will be prudent in listing and delisting.
[20:43:59] <seekwill> Temporary blocks (like greylisting) hurts the user experience. Let's say one of your users asks for a password reset or email confirmation email. They have to wait? yeah right
[20:44:33] <uqlev> seekwill, my users are using submission
[20:44:35] <seekwill> If you host your own server for yourself, fine. But I'm talking about email as a whole
[20:44:38] <seekwill> No
[20:44:44] <rob0> I don't suspect dnswl.org nor SWL of taking bribes for listing. The latter would destroy the reputation of Spamhaus itself if they did.
[20:45:33] <rob0> so, I do feel that whitelists will be an important tool going into v6
[20:45:38] <seekwill> Let's say your user(s) sign up to my website. I send them an email to confirm the signup, but since your server has never seen my IP, you transfail me. Now your user has to wait till my MTA resends?
[20:46:24] <uqlev> problem is to automate creation of private white-lists as mus a possible
[20:46:56] <seekwill> That's the same as automatically creating your own blacklist then, right?
[20:47:19] *** ced117 has quit IRC
[20:47:22] <uqlev> seekwill, right, but for a small corporate server I have no option for subscription to account by email
[20:47:52] <seekwill> I'm not sure what you're saying
[20:48:14] <seekwill> But yeah, small servers are more affected than large servers
[20:48:14] <uqlev> seekwill, my private blacklist is actually 0.0.0.0/0 :)
[20:48:42] <seekwill> "Hey, I just sent you this purchase order. Did you get my order?" "Umm, not yet!"
[20:48:43] <uqlev> seekwill, more affected to what?
[20:48:50] <seekwill> Spam
[20:49:34] *** Gatto has joined #postfix
[20:49:39] <uqlev> seekwill, I am receiving less than 1 spam message per account per month
[20:49:48] <seekwill> Great!
[20:50:12] <uqlev> seekwill, dayly amount about 300-400 messages a day
[20:51:03] <uqlev> seekwill, and server is run on intel-atom 1.66 GHz together with fax-server and asterisk VoIP
[20:51:13] <seekwill> Wow
[20:51:23] <seekwill> I thought the Asterisk server would be a bit taxing. Dual-Core atom?
[20:51:53] <uqlev> yes dual core, I do not do reincoding voice
[20:51:58] <seekwill> oh
[20:52:23] <uqlev> for a small company/shop it is more than enough
[20:52:27] <seekwill> What mailstore?
[20:52:43] <uqlev> IMAP in maildirs
[20:53:07] <uqlev> seekwill, on the same box
[20:54:09] <seekwill> Dovecot?
[20:54:22] <uqlev> yes dovecot 1.2x
[20:54:35] <seekwill> Cool
[20:54:49] <seekwill> How much RAM? And do you have a cool ITX chassis? :)
[20:55:15] <uqlev> 2GB RAM
[20:56:05] <seekwill> You're making me want to get this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811112227
[20:56:59] <uqlev> seekwill, because of private white-list my content scan is very low
[20:57:14] <seekwill> What content scanner do you use?
[20:58:10] <uqlev> seekwill, I would use a slimmer case if could fit there 2 serial ports and 2nd hdd
[20:58:26] <seekwill> Oh, serial ports for the modems?
[20:58:39] <uqlev> and have to ise standard mini tower
[20:58:47] <seekwill> Wait, they are USB these days. Serial ports for what?
[20:58:50] <uqlev> for modem and UPS
[20:58:54] <seekwill> ah
[20:59:12] <seekwill> VoIP man!
[20:59:33] <uqlev> I had once bad experience with UPS with USB
[20:59:54] <uqlev> seekwill, I use termination service from other providers
[20:59:55] <rob0> try a UBS with USP
[21:00:12] <seekwill> USP?
[21:00:53] <uqlev> rob0, in Cyprus there are no big option for UPSs
[21:02:22] <rob0> um, it was a joke :)
[21:04:22] <uqlev> I use cheapest/smallest Trust, Blazer or APC
[21:07:10] *** uqlev has quit IRC
[21:13:25] <seekwill> Damn, that guy made me want to get an ITX box for my mailstore...
[21:14:07] *** wdp_ has quit IRC
[21:14:16] *** phantasm66 has quit IRC
[21:16:24] *** Nik05 has joined #postfix
[21:17:41] *** phantasm66 has joined #postfix
[21:24:58] *** krzee has joined #postfix
[21:26:33] *** krzee has quit IRC
[21:30:55] *** wdp_ has joined #postfix
[21:30:55] *** wdp has quit IRC
[21:31:16] <seekwill> wdp_: !
[21:31:26] <wdp_> hey seekwill!
[21:31:42] <seekwill> What are you doing?
[21:32:03] <wdp_> writing something in java
[21:32:24] <seekwill> sorry to hear that
[21:32:29] <wdp_> hrhr
[21:32:42] <wdp_> i like java.
[21:33:11] <seekwill> I like Javascript too, but I don't usually do UI stuff
[21:33:20] <wdp_> JavaScript !== Java.
[21:33:25] <wdp_> And i'm not doing UI stuff.
[21:40:16] *** phantasm66 has left #postfix
[21:43:22] *** phantasm_ has joined #postfix
[21:44:14] *** wdp_ has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** saftsack__ has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** Guest51924 has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** RedShift has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** rGeoffrey has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** jiffe98 has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** inf_l00p has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** on1ald has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** k1ckn1ck has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** ZoB has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** glitch has quit IRC
[21:44:15] *** Zethrok has quit IRC
[21:45:24] *** thowe has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** wdp_ has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** saftsack__ has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** Guest51924 has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** RedShift has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** rGeoffrey has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** jiffe98 has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** inf_l00p has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** on1ald has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** k1ckn1ck has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** ZoB has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** glitch has joined #postfix
[21:45:31] *** Zethrok has joined #postfix
[21:45:51] <thowe> Is anyone using razor these days to good effect?
[21:48:42] <seekwill> I switched to electric a few years ago
[21:56:25] <buki> it's mostly razor for me :)
[22:06:18] *** Graungaard has quit IRC
[22:12:00] *** phantasm_ has quit IRC
[22:14:31] *** jkfod has joined #postfix
[22:34:56] *** phantasm66 has joined #postfix
[22:40:56] *** p3rror has quit IRC
[22:43:52] *** sphenxes has quit IRC
[22:46:22] *** Gatto has quit IRC
[22:47:49] *** Guest8383 has joined #postfix
[22:48:47] *** Guest8383 has quit IRC
[22:51:10] *** bool has quit IRC
[22:53:59] *** p3rror has joined #postfix
[22:57:38] *** s0ber has quit IRC
[22:59:14] *** s0ber has joined #postfix
[23:08:01] *** krzee has joined #postfix
[23:08:01] *** krzee has joined #postfix
[23:14:29] *** Bry8Star has quit IRC
[23:15:59] *** Bry8Star has joined #postfix
[23:29:48] *** zastaph has joined #postfix
[23:34:57] *** chadmaynard has quit IRC
[23:36:30] <thumbs> seekwill: well, given your origin, electric is more than enough, yes!
[23:37:00] <thumbs> seekwill: I don't think you even have a beard.
[23:53:53] *** Nik05 has quit IRC
top

   February 25, 2012  
< | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | >