Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Advanced Search
Author
Subject
Message
Special notice only

403 results from messages in postfix-users

Advanced Search
  • ...resulting in a 20 minute ban? This works for me... Otherwise you'd get more flexibility at the firewall level for geoip ranges.. Simon
    Simon B Aug 22, 2013
  • ...trapped, or at least marked. The postfix solution would be to use the spamcop rbl (since these mails get logged pretty quick. YMMV. Simon > autolearn=no > Received: from spamfilter.domain.com ([127.0.0.1]) > by spamfilter.domain.com ( [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port...
    Simon B Jul 29, 2013
  • ...postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/smtpd-recipient-restrictions-Best-Practices-td10171.html > Sam > > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Simon B < simon.buongiorno@^$2 > wrote: >> >> >> On 19 Jul 2013 23:28, "Sam Flint" < harmonicnm7h@^$3 > wrote: >> > >> > my postfix will...
    Simon B Jul 19, 2013
  • Fetching Sponsored Content...
  • ...condition is satisfied, you permit if sasl authenticated, and if that's satisfied you reject non-local domains. Do you see the issue? Simon > smtpd_sasl_auth_enable = yes > smtpd_sasl_authenticated_header = yes > smtpd_sasl_path = private/auth > smtpd_sasl_type = dovecot...
    Simon B Jul 19, 2013
  • ...as it's authenticated. If people are sending spam through port 25, you're an open relay. Smtp auth is not the answer you want. Simon
    Simon B Jun 25, 2013
  • ...36208 ESTABLISHED - > tcp 0 0 xx.xx.xx.xx:25 186.46.0.66:16698 ESTABLISHED Presumably they are connecting more than once? Fail2ban? Simon
    Simon B Jun 14, 2013
  • On 31 May 2013 21:07, "Viktor Dukhovni" < postfix-users@^$1 > wrote: > > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 06:46:50PM +0200, Simon B wrote: > > > smtp inet n - - - - smtpd -v > > -o receive_override_options= > > cleanup unix n - - - 0 cleanup -v...thanks Victor & Wietse. So, comment the virtual_alias_maps in pre-clean-up until I get amavis back up and running..? Simon
    Simon B May 31, 2013
  • On 30 May 2013 22:44, Wietse Venema wrote: > Simon B: >> That's what I thought. I did your suggestion and postfix did not >> complain. Not doing postfix stop/start or even /etc/init.d/postfix >> start/stop...try again later" virtual_minimum_uid = 108 virtual_overquota_bounce = yes virtual_transport = dovecot virtual_uid_maps = static:108 Thanks Wietse and Victor SImon
    Simon B May 31, 2013
  • On 29 May 2013 20:05, Jeroen Geilman wrote: > On 05/29/2013 11:26 AM, Simon B wrote: >> >> On 28 May 2013 20:35, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 08:22:56PM +0200, Simon B wrote: >>> >>>> On 28 May...explicitly starting with the -c option to force it to the directory with a -@and it doesn't complain.. Any other advice would be appreciated. Simon
    Simon B May 30, 2013
  • On 28 May 2013 20:35, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 08:22:56PM +0200, Simon B wrote: > >> On 28 May 2013 19:34, "Viktor Dukhovni" wrote: >> > >> > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 07:25:02PM +0200, Simon B wrote...not expanded. That's not right, surely? I even tried adding an empty receive_override_options to the smtp line before the stop/start. Simon
    Simon B May 29, 2013