Menu
▾
▴
webadmin-list
|
From: Jamie C. <jca...@we...> - 2006-11-18 00:59:20
|
On 17/Nov/2006 16:46 John Hinton wrote .. > Am I right in assuming that if I set an email alias in Virtualmin to > bounce, that it is in fact a bounce and not a reject? If so, are there > any suggestions on setting up rejects on particular addresses? > > The problem is spammers have started using what up until now were > 'sacred' email addresses. System addresses. Webmaster, root, mail, uucp, > and on and on. I really would rather reject them instead of allowing > them to come in, get processed through SpamAssassin (the resource hog) > in particular before they get dumped to /dev/null.. or worse, wind up in > my inbox as I do receive webmaster, postmaster, abuse and root. Root > gets a lot dumped to it. If you setup an alias to bounce email, it will be applied before any spam filtering. SpamAssassin only gets run on email delivered to local mailboxes, which won't happen here.. - Jamie |
|
From: John H. <web...@ew...> - 2006-11-18 01:21:06
|
Jamie Cameron wrote: > On 17/Nov/2006 16:46 John Hinton wrote .. > >> Am I right in assuming that if I set an email alias in Virtualmin to >> bounce, that it is in fact a bounce and not a reject? If so, are there >> any suggestions on setting up rejects on particular addresses? >> >> The problem is spammers have started using what up until now were >> 'sacred' email addresses. System addresses. Webmaster, root, mail, uucp, >> and on and on. I really would rather reject them instead of allowing >> them to come in, get processed through SpamAssassin (the resource hog) >> in particular before they get dumped to /dev/null.. or worse, wind up in >> my inbox as I do receive webmaster, postmaster, abuse and root. Root >> gets a lot dumped to it. >> > > If you setup an alias to bounce email, it will be applied before any > spam filtering. SpamAssassin only gets run on email delivered to local > mailboxes, which won't happen here.. > > - Jamie > Don't you just love being a Linux sysadmin instead of just the master behind Webmin? OK, duh.. that is right. So, delivery to /dev/null is not so server intensive. But, just to be sure, this is a 'bounce' and not a 'reject'? These days bouncing is a very bad idea which will land you on SpamCop blacklist to name just one. And, I really don't want to bounce to someone who didn't send the email to start with, which would be the case with 99.999% of these emails. BTW, the latest new 'surge' in spamming methods is via bouncing (to spoofed email addresses) off some poorly setup server. I'm actually trying to figure out a way to do a reject on this type of mail. Yes, root@<servername> needs to work, but root@<some_domain_on_that_server> is just bothersome junkmail that I would love to reject. I've been thinking about using your new Virtualmin default email addresses to automatically create /dev/null addresses for these accounts... but.. I'd really like the real sender to know that these are not good addresses as well as just not bother my system with actually receiving the junk. And again thanks for this great system! John Hinton |
|
From: Jamie C. <jca...@we...> - 2006-11-18 01:40:04
|
On 17/Nov/2006 17:20 John Hinton wrote .. > Jamie Cameron wrote: > > On 17/Nov/2006 16:46 John Hinton wrote .. > > > >> Am I right in assuming that if I set an email alias in Virtualmin to > >> bounce, that it is in fact a bounce and not a reject? If so, are there > >> any suggestions on setting up rejects on particular addresses? > >> > >> The problem is spammers have started using what up until now were > >> 'sacred' email addresses. System addresses. Webmaster, root, mail, uucp, > >> and on and on. I really would rather reject them instead of allowing > >> them to come in, get processed through SpamAssassin (the resource hog) > >> in particular before they get dumped to /dev/null.. or worse, wind up > in > >> my inbox as I do receive webmaster, postmaster, abuse and root. Root > >> gets a lot dumped to it. > >> > > > > If you setup an alias to bounce email, it will be applied before any > > spam filtering. SpamAssassin only gets run on email delivered to local > > mailboxes, which won't happen here.. > > > > - Jamie > > > Don't you just love being a Linux sysadmin instead of just the master > behind Webmin? > > OK, duh.. that is right. So, delivery to /dev/null is not so server > intensive. But, just to be sure, this is a 'bounce' and not a 'reject'? Virtualmin offers two options - bouncing, and 'throwing away' the message, which delivers to /dev/null. > These days bouncing is a very bad idea which will land you on SpamCop > blacklist to name just one. And, I really don't want to bounce to > someone who didn't send the email to start with, which would be the case > with 99.999% of these emails. BTW, the latest new 'surge' in spamming > methods is via bouncing (to spoofed email addresses) off some poorly > setup server. > > I'm actually trying to figure out a way to do a reject on this type of > mail. Yes, root@<servername> needs to work, but > root@<some_domain_on_that_server> is just bothersome junkmail that I > would love to reject. > > I've been thinking about using your new Virtualmin default email > addresses to automatically create /dev/null addresses for these > accounts... but.. I'd really like the real sender to know that these are > not good addresses as well as just not bother my system with actually > receiving the junk. Currently, it creates aliases for those addresses pointing to the domain owner, which is the RFC-specified correct thing to do. But you can change this in the server template if you like .. - Jamie |
|
From: Kris D. <kd...@vi...> - 2006-11-21 18:13:46
|
Jamie Cameron wrote: > Currently, it creates aliases for those addresses pointing to the > domain owner, which is the RFC-specified correct thing to do. But you > can change this in the server template if you like .. Mmmh. Which addresses to you alias like this? The only two I can thing of offhand that MUST receive mail according to any of the mail RFCs (and really shouldn't be directed to /dev/null <g>) are postmaster@ and abuse@. root@ isn't referred to anywhere in the mail RFCs that I know of, although in the past it would be reasonable to be able to reach a sysadmin at such an address. (Along with about 20 other semistandard UNIX aliases; none of which are listed anywhere in any mail RFC I can recall.) Quite a few aren't even really relevant to Internet services; they're intended to be aliases for LAN sysadmins. -kgd |
|
From: Jamie C. <jca...@we...> - 2006-11-21 18:17:59
|
On 21/Nov/2006 10:13 Kris Deugau wrote .. > Jamie Cameron wrote: > > Currently, it creates aliases for those addresses pointing to the > > domain owner, which is the RFC-specified correct thing to do. But you > > can change this in the server template if you like .. > > Mmmh. Which addresses to you alias like this? The only two I can thing > of offhand that MUST receive mail according to any of the mail RFCs (and > really shouldn't be directed to /dev/null <g>) are postmaster@ and abuse@. > > root@ isn't referred to anywhere in the mail RFCs that I know of, > although in the past it would be reasonable to be able to reach a > sysadmin at such an address. (Along with about 20 other semistandard > UNIX aliases; none of which are listed anywhere in any mail RFC I can > recall.) Quite a few aren't even really relevant to Internet services; > they're intended to be aliases for LAN sysadmins. My mistake, you are correct .. the default aliases are only for postmaster, abuse, webmaster and hostmaster. It would be OK from an RFC point of view to alias root@yourdomain to /dev/null. - Jamie |
