efa-project.org

shawniverson,

Nicola has created a number of plugins that might be worth bundling (even if disabled by default) with the default v4 EFA.

I don't know how EFA will behave. Easiest thing to do would be to test it. Stop the service on the first mailserver - does EFA error out? Does it try the second in the list? I honestly don't know what it would do. --- That said, if I were setting up a HA back end for my mail service, I'd have two ma...

I shall have to migrate to v4 and see if this is still a problem.

Good question!

I confess I was too lazy to debug it when I found the command line work around.

Any takers?

Just as you did. All good.

How did you resolve it? Why was that address being rejected in the first place?

huh? That domain exists, so therefor it will past the initial postfix checks. This is what you should be seeing: [pdwalker@pdwmac:~/Documents/VirtualMachines] {517} $ nslookup thisdoesnotexistasadomain.com Server: 10.10.1.1 Address: 10.10.1.1#53 ** server can't find thisdoesnotexistasadomain.com: NX...

Thanks for posting the answer to your problem. That'll help the next person who needs it.

Sounds like the GeoIP database problem.

Search the forums for recent posts on GeoIP and make sure your GeoIP data files are correct. (sorry, just driving by, no time to search for it myself)

This is what I do when that happens:

• edit the /var/lib/clamav/my-whitelist.ign2 file
• add in the signature MBL_34101911
• run freshclam or restart clamd
• resubmit the message

  /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix -t < /var/spool/MailScanner/quarantine/<YYMMDD>/<MESSAGEID>/message

Edit the /etc/MailScanner/filename.rules.conf file and commment out that rule using the # character.

I find that rule to be a nuisance.

What happens when you try to resolve the address of the non existent domains using that domain server?

So your configuration seems correct and it should work. The only think I can think of is if it a problem with your DNS? Is postfix able to successfully do the DNS lookups necessary for the checks? Maybe you'll have to run postfix in debug mode to check what happens when one of these connections come...

smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, permit_sasl_authenticated, check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/sender_access, reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_unknown_sender_domain smtpd_helo_restrictions = check_helo_access hash:/etc/postfix/helo_access, reject_invalid_helo_hostname smtpd_recipient...

I've not tried this, so these instructions may break your system - be careful. 1/ you could rename the /var/www/html/mailscanner directory to appliance - this would likely break updates as EFA expects to find a "mailscanner" directory - you'll need to edt your conf.php to set the right directory pat...

huh? If I understand you correctly, then there is nothing you need to do. Since EFA is not used for outbound, it won't be used for outbound. If EFA is being used as a relay by your internal users, I suggest you find out why your internal users are doing that. If you're really paranoid, you can set y...

Nicola to the rescue, yet again!

The blacklist sites used to tell you why you were blocked. Is that no longer the case?

Is there anything helpful in your /var/log/maillog? For example, I see the following entries that tells me it is working as expected: Oct 20 04:20:45 efa postfix/smtpd[12399]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[193.32.160.154]: 450 4.7.1 Client host rejected: cannot find your reverse hostname, [193....

Thanks for posting your answer to your problem. That's helpful for future users.

so what did you change to make it work?

Brave man! You must like administering servers. I used to do "crazy" things like that, but experience has taught me that it is better to go the appliance route so you don't have to worry about things breaking when you upgrade them. Also, with vm's being so easy to use - it's easy for me to spin up a...

(replying to an older topic for anyone else who may come across this problem) enriluis, if you check with the individual blacklists, you may be able to find the reason why you've been marked as a spammer. If you get on these lists, you have to check each one individually to see if you can find the w...

Wow. 4 years later on and here we are.

Maybe we should consider Centos 8. After all, Centos 7 is only supported until 2024 which is just around the corner.

Centos 8 will get us to 2027 at least.

Time sure flies!

(added the image that was not visible on the first post)