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

Re: Disable check sender address syntax

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      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 2 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        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 3 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          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 4 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            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 5 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              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 6 of 14 , Nov 1, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                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.