Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Disable check sender address syntax

Expand Messages
  • Benny Pedersen
    ... add [] around hostname sillyexample@[127.0.0.1]
    Message 1 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
      Michal Kurka skrev den 01-11-2012 16:05:
      > Hello.
      > I need accept incoming mails with invalid envelope sender
      > address. But
      > Postfix reject these mails:
      >
      > MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
      > 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax

      add [] around hostname

      sillyexample@[127.0.0.1]
    • Michal Kurka
      ... Unfortunately I cannot set up that mail client which sending this ugly address. It always send MAIL FROM: -- Michal Kurka - Mysak sluzby
      Message 2 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
        Dne 1.11.2012 v 16:18 Benny Pedersen napsal(a):

        > Michal Kurka skrev den 01-11-2012 16:05:
        > > Hello.
        > > I need accept incoming mails with invalid envelope sender address. But
        > > Postfix reject these mails:
        > >
        > > MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
        > > 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax
        >
        > add [] around hostname
        >
        > sillyexample@[127.0.0.1]

        Unfortunately I cannot set up that mail client which sending this ugly
        address. It always send MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>

        --
        Michal Kurka - Mysak
        sluzby spojene s operacnim systemem Linux
      • Viktor Dukhovni
        ... http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_command_filter -- Viktor.
        Message 3 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
          On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 04:05:18PM +0100, Michal Kurka wrote:

          > Hello.
          > I need accept incoming mails with invalid envelope sender address. But
          > Postfix reject these mails:
          >
          > MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
          > 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax

          http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_command_filter

          --
          Viktor.
        • Reindl Harald
          ... why not? are you not the admin of this client? if so then tell the admin if he wants to send mail to you he has to play with your rules and not with his
          Message 4 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
            Am 01.11.2012 16:48, schrieb Michal Kurka:
            > Dne 1.11.2012 v 16:18 Benny Pedersen napsal(a):
            >
            >> Michal Kurka skrev den 01-11-2012 16:05:
            >>> Hello.
            >>> I need accept incoming mails with invalid envelope sender address. But
            >>> Postfix reject these mails:
            >>>
            >>> MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
            >>> 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax
            >>
            >> add [] around hostname
            >>
            >> sillyexample@[127.0.0.1]
            >
            > Unfortunately I cannot set up that mail client which sending this ugly
            > address. It always send MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>

            why not?
            are you not the admin of this client?

            if so then tell the admin if he wants to send mail
            to you he has to play with your rules and not with his
          • Benny Pedersen
            ... and telnet 168.1.150 25 works ? have you invented ipv3 for mobilephones ? :) it should be possible to make it contain valid sender address
            Message 5 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
              Michal Kurka skrev den 01-11-2012 16:48:

              > Unfortunately I cannot set up that mail client which sending this
              > ugly
              > address. It always send MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>

              and telnet 168.1.150 25 works ?

              have you invented ipv3 for mobilephones ? :)

              it should be possible to make it contain valid sender address
            • Claus Assmann
              ... Which also has a command syntax error: space after colon is invalid. This is explicitly listed in RFC 5321, pg.20: Since it has been a common source of
              Message 6 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
                >address. It always send MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>

                Which also has a command syntax error: space after colon is invalid.
                This is explicitly listed in RFC 5321, pg.20:

                Since it has been a common source of errors, it is worth noting that
                spaces are not permitted on either side of the colon following FROM
                in the MAIL command or TO in the RCPT command. The syntax is exactly
                as given above.

                You might want to contact the author of that garbage...
              • Michal Kurka
                ... Yes, nice solution, thanks for a link! But is some solution for Postfix version 2.1), if upgrade isn t possible? ... Bad mail client is
                Message 7 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
                  Dne 1.11.2012 v 15:56 Viktor Dukhovni napsal(a):

                  > > I need accept incoming mails with invalid envelope sender address. But
                  > > Postfix reject these mails:
                  > >
                  > > MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
                  > > 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax
                  >
                  > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_command_filter

                  Yes, nice solution, thanks for a link!

                  But is some solution for Postfix version <2.7 (and >2.1), if upgrade
                  isn't possible?


                  Dne 1.11.2012 v 17:01 Reindl Harald napsal(a):

                  > >> add [] around hostname
                  > >>
                  > >> sillyexample@[127.0.0.1]
                  > >
                  > > Unfortunately I cannot set up that mail client which sending this ugly
                  > > address. It always send MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
                  >
                  > why not? are you not the admin of this client?

                  Bad mail client is encapsulated in a proprietary application.


                  Dne 1.11.2012 v 17:32 Benny Pedersen napsal(a):

                  > > Unfortunately I cannot set up that mail client which sending this ugly
                  > > address. It always send MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
                  >
                  > and telnet 168.1.150 25 works ?
                  > have you invented ipv3 for mobilephones ? :)

                  Yes, author of mail client had a sense of humor :-)

                  > it should be possible to make it contain valid sender address

                  Yes, should be. But it isn't :-(

                  --
                  Michal Kurka - Mysak
                  sluzby spojene s operacnim systemem Linux
                • Viktor Dukhovni
                  ... Upgrades are always *possible*. You just need to be sufficiently motivated. Which is more pain, rejecting the mail, or doing the upgrade? Another option is
                  Message 8 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
                    On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 05:44:33PM +0100, Michal Kurka wrote:

                    > > > MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
                    > > > 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax
                    > >
                    > > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_command_filter
                    >
                    > Yes, nice solution, thanks for a link!
                    >
                    > But is some solution for Postfix version <2.7 (and >2.1), if upgrade
                    > isn't possible?

                    Upgrades are always *possible*. You just need to be sufficiently
                    motivated. Which is more pain, rejecting the mail, or doing the
                    upgrade?

                    Another option is to point the mail at a different server, which
                    is upgraded, or at a proxy that performs the same sender "address"
                    (what the application sends is not an address) transformation.

                    --
                    Viktor.
                  • Reindl Harald
                    ... why should a upgrade not be possible? postfix is damned stable from the view of compatibility builing a postfix package with the tools of your distribution
                    Message 9 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
                      Am 01.11.2012 17:44, schrieb Michal Kurka:
                      > Dne 1.11.2012 v 15:56 Viktor Dukhovni napsal(a):
                      >>> I need accept incoming mails with invalid envelope sender address. But
                      >>> Postfix reject these mails:
                      >>>
                      >>> MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
                      >>> 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax
                      >>
                      >> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_command_filter
                      >
                      > Yes, nice solution, thanks for a link!
                      >
                      > But is some solution for Postfix version <2.7 (and >2.1), if upgrade
                      > isn't possible?

                      why should a upgrade not be possible?

                      postfix is damned stable from the view of compatibility
                      builing a postfix package with the tools of your
                      distribution should be easy, i am doing this since
                      i started with mailservers some years ago because
                      the fedora packages are missing mysql support or
                      at least missed it years ago

                      postfix-2.8.10-1.fc15: newest official package for F15
                      postfix-2.8.12-1.fc16: newest official package for F16

                      update history of this year:
                      Feb 01 20:41:03 Updated: 2:postfix-2.8.8-2.fc15.20120201.rh.x86_64
                      Feb 05 02:53:32 Updated: 2:postfix-2.9.0-2.fc15.20120205.rh.x86_64
                      Feb 12 19:57:33 Updated: 2:postfix-2.9.0-2.fc15.20120212.rh.x86_64
                      Feb 22 20:10:20 Updated: 2:postfix-2.9.1-2.fc15.20120222.rh.x86_64
                      Mar 27 01:08:16 Updated: 2:postfix-2.9.1-3.fc16.20120325.rh.x86_64
                      Apr 25 22:27:31 Updated: 2:postfix-2.9.2-3.fc16.20120425.rh.x86_64
                      May 22 12:38:08 Updated: 2:postfix-2.9.3-3.fc16.20120522.rh.x86_64
                      Aug 03 12:18:02 Updated: 2:postfix-2.9.4-3.fc16.20120803.rh.x86_64
                      Oct 17 21:48:11 Updated: 2:postfix-2.9.4-3.fc17.20121016.rh.x86_64

                      >>> Unfortunately I cannot set up that mail client which sending this ugly
                      >>> address. It always send MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
                      >>
                      >> why not? are you not the admin of this client?
                      >
                      > Bad mail client is encapsulated in a proprietary application.

                      make a bug-report at the company who is responsible
                      for this useless crap with silly defaults and lack
                      of configuration

                      >> and telnet 168.1.150 25 works ?
                      >> have you invented ipv3 for mobilephones ? :)
                      >
                      > Yes, author of mail client had a sense of humor :-)

                      the author does not have humor - he is missing any qualification
                      to write a mail-client and finally even take money for his crap
                    • Michal Kurka
                      ... Yes. Fortunately Postfix this tolerates. ... It s true. But sometimes this stance isn t good. ... If server has older system, then upgrade means either
                      Message 10 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
                        Dne 1.11.2012 v 09:37 Claus Assmann napsal(a):

                        > >address. It always send MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
                        >
                        > Which also has a command syntax error: space after colon is invalid.

                        Yes. Fortunately Postfix this tolerates.


                        Dne 1.11.2012 v 16:48 Viktor Dukhovni napsal(a):

                        > > But is some solution for Postfix version <2.7 (and >2.1), if upgrade
                        > > isn't possible?
                        >
                        > Upgrades are always *possible*. You just need to be sufficiently
                        > motivated. Which is more pain, rejecting the mail, or doing the
                        > upgrade?

                        It's true. But sometimes this stance isn't good.


                        Dne 1.11.2012 v 17:57 Reindl Harald napsal(a):

                        > > But is some solution for Postfix version <2.7 (and >2.1), if upgrade
                        > > isn't possible?
                        >
                        > why should a upgrade not be possible?

                        If server has older system, then upgrade means either reinstall whole
                        server or compile new version Postfix and hope no earlier glibc needed -
                        both variants expensive for me.

                        > > Bad mail client is encapsulated in a proprietary application.
                        >
                        > make a bug-report at the company who is responsible
                        > for this useless crap with silly defaults and lack
                        > of configuration

                        Yes, of course bug-report was created before one year. Author of
                        application is too big company and I too small company. Official answer is
                        - with Gmail no problem. I like Postfix more than Gmail ;-)

                        --
                        Michal Kurka - Mysak
                        sluzby spojene s operacnim systemem Linux
                      • Viktor Dukhovni
                        ... Not the case with Postfix. Postfix still compiles on very old operating systems, until recently (and perhaps still) these included SunOS 4.1.3 which was
                        Message 11 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
                          On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 07:06:04PM +0100, Michal Kurka wrote:

                          > Dne 1.11.2012 v 16:48 Viktor Dukhovni napsal(a):
                          >
                          > > > But is some solution for Postfix version <2.7 (and >2.1), if upgrade
                          > > > isn't possible?
                          > >
                          > > Upgrades are always *possible*. You just need to be sufficiently
                          > > motivated. Which is more pain, rejecting the mail, or doing the
                          > > upgrade?
                          >
                          > It's true. But sometimes this stance isn't good.

                          Not the case with Postfix. Postfix still compiles on very old
                          operating systems, until recently (and perhaps still) these included
                          SunOS 4.1.3 which was last released 20 years ago.

                          > > why should a upgrade not be possible?
                          >
                          > If server has older system, then upgrade means either reinstall whole
                          > server or compile new version Postfix and hope no earlier glibc needed -
                          > both variants expensive for me.

                          Postfix will work on your relatively young system, it is probably less
                          than a decade old.

                          --
                          Viktor.
                        • /dev/rob0
                          ... FWIW, I have been running snapshots up to and including 2.10 on a Slackware 10.0 host. That s old. Only thing close to a problem I remember was something
                          Message 12 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
                            On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 07:06:04PM +0100, Michal Kurka wrote:
                            > Dne 1.11.2012 v 17:57 Reindl Harald napsal(a):
                            >
                            > > > But is some solution for Postfix version <2.7 (and >2.1), if
                            > > > upgrade isn't possible?
                            > >
                            > > why should a upgrade not be possible?
                            >
                            > If server has older system, then upgrade means either reinstall
                            > whole server or compile new version Postfix and hope no earlier
                            > glibc needed - both variants expensive for me.

                            FWIW, I have been running snapshots up to and including 2.10 on a
                            Slackware 10.0 host. That's old. Only thing close to a problem I
                            remember was something about the ancient openssl, but it wasn't a
                            major problem, which is why I can't remember the fix. :)

                            > > > Bad mail client is encapsulated in a proprietary application.
                            > >
                            > > make a bug-report at the company who is responsible
                            > > for this useless crap with silly defaults and lack
                            > > of configuration
                            >
                            > Yes, of course bug-report was created before one year. Author of
                            > application is too big company and I too small company. Official
                            > answer is - with Gmail no problem. I like Postfix more than Gmail
                            > ;-)

                            Perhaps, but you can't always expect Postfix to fix other bad
                            programming.
                            --
                            http://rob0.nodns4.us/ -- system administration and consulting
                            Offlist GMX mail is seen only if "/dev/rob0" is in the Subject:
                          • Wietse Venema
                            ... The SMTP server supports command rewriting with regular expressions. It was created for cases like this (and for testing such cases). smtpd_command_filter
                            Message 13 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
                              Michal Kurka:
                              > Hello.
                              > I need accept incoming mails with invalid envelope sender address. But
                              > Postfix reject these mails:
                              >
                              > MAIL FROM: <@168.1.150>
                              > 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax
                              >
                              > I used "sender_canonical_maps" with record
                              > @168.1.150 user@...
                              > but this isn't enough.
                              >
                              > (In old version Postfix (2.1.5) it was enough.)
                              >
                              > How can I solve this now?

                              The SMTP server supports command rewriting with regular expressions.
                              It was created for cases like this (and for testing such cases).

                              smtpd_command_filter (default: empty)
                              A mechanism to transform commands from remote SMTP clients. This is a
                              last-resort tool to work around client commands that break inter-oper-
                              ability with the Postfix SMTP server. Other uses involve fault injec-
                              tion to test Postfix's handling of invalid commands.

                              Specify the name of a "type:table" lookup table. The search string is
                              the SMTP command as received from the remote SMTP client, except that
                              initial whitespace and the trailing <CR><LF> are removed. The result
                              value is executed by the Postfix SMTP server.

                              See also the examples of things that don't need smtpd_command_filter,
                              and of things that do.

                              Wietse
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.