hi,
ive got a setup problem and im now on my 9th attempt at setting up
mailman with exim4 :(
im using debian sarge with kernel 2.6.8-2-386 on a firehol box with
ipmasq etc
(exim4 , mailman & apache2 from apt-get sources)
i ran "update-exim4.conf -o /etc/exim4/exim4.conf" to make my
exim4.conf
file then added the instructions as in
http://www.exim.org/howto/mailman21.html#roconf
the problem i have is that i can see the web pages ..subsrcibe with test
accounts...unsubscribe etc, but posts allways come back with this email :-
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
mailman@kick.no-ip.info
local delivery failed
------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------
Return-path: <kick@kick.no-ip.info>
Received: from [192.168.1.36] (helo=[192.168.1.36] ident=kick)
by irc-mail-firewall.foster-clan with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1EQ4yN-0005yh-KC
for mailman@kick.no-ip.info; Thu, 13 Oct 2005 16:26:23 +0100
Message-ID: <434E7C51.5090706@kick.no-ip.info>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 16:25:05 +0100
From: kick <kick@kick.no-ip.info>
User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050817)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mailman@kick.no-ip.info
Subject: (no subject)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
& logcheck mails me this :-
System Events=-=-=-=-=-=-=Oct 13 15:02:28 irc-mail-firewall Mailman
mail-wrapper: Group mismatch error. Mailman expected the mail wrapper
script to be executed as group "daemon", but the system''s
mail server
executed the mail script as group "mailman". Try tweaking the mail
server to run the script as group "daemon", or re-run configure,
providing the command line option `--with-mail-gid=mailman''.
apart from the group errors i dont suppose im missing something like
firewall am i??
all help is much appreciated..thanx
Nigel Metheringham
2005-Oct-13 15:52 UTC
[Pkg-exim4-users] help needed on exim4 permission''s please.
On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 16:38 +0100, kick wrote:> hi, > ive got a setup problem and im now on my 9th attempt at setting up > mailman with exim4 :( > > im using debian sarge with kernel 2.6.8-2-386 on a firehol box with > ipmasq etc > (exim4 , mailman & apache2 from apt-get sources) > i ran "update-exim4.conf -o /etc/exim4/exim4.conf" to make my exim4.conf > file then added the instructions as in > http://www.exim.org/howto/mailman21.html#roconfDid you also add the main config settings bits - http://www.exim.org/howto/mailman21.html#maconf> System Events=-=-=-=-=-=-=Oct 13 15:02:28 irc-mail-firewall Mailman > mail-wrapper: Group mismatch error. Mailman expected the mail wrapper > script to be executed as group "daemon", but the system''s mail server > executed the mail script as group "mailman". Try tweaking the mail > server to run the script as group "daemon", or re-run configure, > providing the command line option `--with-mail-gid=mailman''.You should change the MM_GID setting which should currently look like this:- MM_GID=mailman to be MM_GID=daemon Nigel.
Marc Haber
2005-Oct-13 16:21 UTC
[Pkg-exim4-users] help needed on exim4 permission''s please.
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 04:38:31PM +0100, kick wrote:> ive got a setup problem and im now on my 9th attempt at setting up > mailman with exim4 :( > > im using debian sarge with kernel 2.6.8-2-386 on a firehol box with > ipmasq etc > (exim4 , mailman & apache2 from apt-get sources)Why do you roll your own packages if you then can''t get them to fly yourself?> i ran "update-exim4.conf -o /etc/exim4/exim4.conf" to make my exim4.conf > file then added the instructions as in > http://www.exim.org/howto/mailman21.html#roconfThere is a wishlist bug report against mailman which gives more detailed information about interfacing exim with mailman "the Debian way". No need to switch off all Debianisms by rolling your own config. See #303342.> System Events=-=-=-=-=-=-=Oct 13 15:02:28 irc-mail-firewall Mailman > mail-wrapper: Group mismatch error. Mailman expected the mail wrapper > script to be executed as group "daemon", but the system''s mail server > executed the mail script as group "mailman". Try tweaking the mail > server to run the script as group "daemon", or re-run configure, > providing the command line option `--with-mail-gid=mailman''.That looks like you have severely misconfigured the packages while doing your local rebuilds. The Debian stock mailman runs as user list, group list.> apart from the group errors i dont suppose im missing something like > firewall am i??You are obviously missing the basic knowledge needed to do what you want, and you''re making things unnecessarily hard by trying to re-invent wheels that the Distribution has already invented for you (and much better than your own invention obviously). Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don''t trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835
Andreas Metzler
2005-Oct-15 10:22 UTC
[Pkg-exim4-users] help needed on exim4 permission''s please.
On 2005-10-13 kick <kick@kick.no-ip.info> wrote:> hi, > ive got a setup problem and im now on my 9th attempt at setting up > mailman with exim4 :(> im using debian sarge with kernel 2.6.8-2-386 on a firehol box with > ipmasq etc > (exim4 , mailman & apache2 from apt-get sources) > i ran "update-exim4.conf -o /etc/exim4/exim4.conf" to make my exim4.conf > file then added the instructions as in > http://www.exim.org/howto/mailman21.html#roconf[...]> System Events=-=-=-=-=-=-=Oct 13 15:02:28 irc-mail-firewall Mailman > mail-wrapper: Group mismatch error. Mailman expected the mail wrapper > script to be executed as group "daemon", but the system''s mail server > executed the mail script as group "mailman". Try tweaking the mail[...] Debian''s mailman runs as list:daemon instead of mailman:mailman as used in <http://www.exim.org/howto/mailman21.html#roconf>. Please refer to /usr/share/doc/mailman/README.EXIM.gz which is adapted for Debian''s paths and user conventions. cu andreas -- The ''Galactic Cleaning'' policy undertaken by Emperor Zhark is a personal vision of the emperor''s, and its inclusion in this work does not constitute tacit approval by the author or the publisher for any such projects, howsoever undertaken. (c) Jasper Ffforde
Hi,
When I started up my email server I configured with Sa-exim to stop SPAM.
But I still receiving a lot of SPAM so I decided to include DNS lists to
improve the SPAM rejection.
These are the lines I included.
deny
hosts = !+rbl_white_hosts
message = Host is listed in $dnslist_domain
!authenticated = *
dnslists = \
relays.ordb.org : \
dnsbl.sorbs.net
But the dnsbl.sorbs.net began to stop valid messages from servers like
hotmail, yahoo and others behind DSL connections.
In this moment I''m thinking to solve it taking away the dnsbl.sorbs.net
and
adding to a warn list.
# DNS based blacklists
deny
hosts = !+rbl_white_hosts
message = Host is listed in $dnslist_domain
!authenticated = *
dnslists = \
relays.ordb.org
warn
hosts = !+rbl_white_hosts
message = X-Warning: $sender_host_address listed by $dnslist_domain
log_message = Listed by $dnslist_domain
dnslists = dnsbl.sorbs.net
I''d like to receive your comments about it. Do you think it''s
a good idea?
Can I Improving with somthing else?
It''s a better way to keep the SPAM away?
Or could be better to left the SA-exim alone?
TIA
Regards
Jesus Gutierrez
* Jose de Jesus Gutierrez Ramirez (jgtez@previtep.com.mx) [051020 18:30]:> dnslists = \ > relays.ordb.org : \ > dnsbl.sorbs.net> In this moment I''m thinking to solve it taking away the dnsbl.sorbs.net and > adding to a warn list.> I''d like to receive your comments about it. Do you think it''s a good idea? > Can I Improving with somthing else? > It''s a better way to keep the SPAM away? > Or could be better to left the SA-exim alone?I personally stopped using blocklists at all for anti-spam, because the risk is too high that valid mail is rejected. I currently use protocol checks, whitelisting and clamav, and that works pretty well. Cheers, Andi
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:56:42AM -0600, Jose de Jesus Gutierrez Ramirez wrote:> When I started up my email server I configured with Sa-exim to stop SPAM. > But I still receiving a lot of SPAM so I decided to include DNS lists to > improve the SPAM rejection.(a) Please do not start new topics by replying to old messages. You''ll place your new message in an old thread which is at least confusing. (b) SPAM is a trademark of Hormel Industries for their Spiced Pork and Met product. Please use Spam as reference to unsolicited E-Mail Advertising, or - even better - the technical acronmy UCE. Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don''t trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835
Marc Haber wrote:> [snip] > >(a) Please do not start new topics by replying to old messages. You''ll >place your new message in an old thread which is at least confusing. > >(b) SPAM is a trademark of Hormel Industries for their Spiced Pork and >Met product. Please use Spam as reference to unsolicited E-Mail >Advertising, or - even better - the technical acronmy UCE. > >You''re joking, right? :) Fish
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 12:21:14AM +0100, Mark Crean wrote:> You''re joking, right?Not at all, why? Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don''t trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835
On Friday, October 21, 2005 12:21 AM, Mark Crean <mcrean@snowpetrel.net> wrote:> Marc Haber wrote:[...]>> (b) SPAM is a trademark of Hormel Industries for their Spiced Pork >> and Met product. Please use Spam as reference to unsolicited E-Mail >> Advertising, or - even better - the technical acronmy UCE. >> >> > You''re joking, right?No - http://www.spam.com/ci/ci_in.htm Regards, Adam
Marc Haber wrote:>On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 12:21:14AM +0100, Mark Crean wrote: > > >>You''re joking, right? >> >> > >Not at all, why? > > > >Because I wondered whether you could tell a joke if you fell over one. Thanks for confirming it. :) Fish
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 10:21:44AM +0100, Mark Crean wrote:> Because I wondered whether you could tell a joke if you fell over one. > Thanks for confirming it.I obviously also cannot tell a personal insult if I fell over one. If you want me to read your messages again, use a different mail address. Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don''t trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835
=?us-ascii?Q?Jose_de_Jesus_Gutierrez_Ramirez?= <jgtez@previtep.com.mx> wrote:> >Can I Improving with somthing else?Use sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org. It''s *extremely* reliable and effective. There is a recent survey of DNS blacklist accuracy at http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsblAccuracy082005 You might want to consider using subsets of the SORBS list to avoid its more unreliable components. For example, I have a note to try out the following - I don''t yet know if it will work well in practice. deny message = ${sender_host_address} is listed at ${dnslist_domain}; \ ${dnslist_text} dnslists = dnsbl.sorbs.net!=127.0.0.6,127.0.0.7,127.0.0.8,127.0.0.10 See http://www.nl.sorbs.net/using.shtml for the meaning of the SORBS codes. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch <dot@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ THE MULL OF GALLOWAY TO MULL OF KINTYRE INCLUDING THE FIRTH OF CLYDE AND THE NORTH CHANNEL: EAST BACKING NORTHEAST 4 OR 5 THEN NORTH 3 OR 4. RAIN THEN SHOWERS. MODERATE BECOMING GOOD. SLIGHT OR MODERATE.