stricter postfix settings

Luke Schierer lschiere at
Sun Jun 13 23:57:32 EDT 2010

any person who's name is in the about box as a developer is eligible for an account.  If you lack one, email me and I can set you up.


On Jun 13, 2010, at 23:54 EDT, Paul Aurich wrote:

> On 2010-06-13 14:22, Ethan Blanton wrote:
>> Paul Aurich spake unto us the following wisdom:
>>> At John's suggestion, I'm bringing this up here.
>>> It would be nice if the mail servers were a bit more
>>> restrictive in what mail they accept.  In particular, my
>>> ( mail server is routinely rejecting a message or two
>>> coming from bogus domains:
>>> postfix/smtpd: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from[]:
>>> 450 4.1.8 <apache at localhost.localdomain>: Sender address rejected:
>>> Domain not found; from=<apache at localhost.localdomain>
>>> to=<paul at> proto=ESMTP helo=<>
>> We have traditionally handled such things with per-user spam filters
>> (spamprobe is available on rock, as is spamassassin; the latter can
>> check for this condition).  I could be convinced to add this
>> particular check to the default config, if there's general
>> concurrence.  I find it annoying, myself, but basically everyone has
>> to have their outgoing mail set up to spoof as necessary, anyway,
>> since so many servers set it.
> A [growing] number of people (myself included) with mail aliases don't
> have accounts, so we can't set up spam filters.  (I also suspect a
> .forward would use a valid sender address, though I don't think I've
> looked.)  I might be the only one who compulsively reads all my logcheck
> emails, though.
>>> There might be other things that could be added (greylisting or pinging
>>> an RBL come to mind), but I don't feel as strongly about those.
>> I am personally opposed to both of these.  Greylisting slows down
>> legitimate emails by a potentially long time (if mail servers are set
>> conservatively, as they should be, it can reasonably be several
>> hours).  As far as RBLs ... there are RBLs and then there are RBLs.
>> I'd prefer to leave this up to the individual user's spam filters.
>> I'll push back on both greylisting and RBLs, but I am ultimately only
>> one voice.
> I figure that's the general sentiment on both (and I don't think any
> spam forwarded via reaches my inbox, so I don't care much).  I
> thought I'd mention them just in case. :)
> ~Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at

More information about the Discussion mailing list