search for: pazarena

...PM, Larry Rosenman wrote: > login_access_sockets = tcpwrap > > service tcpwrap { > unix_listener login/tcpwrap { > group = $default_login_user > mode = 0600 > user = $default_login_user > } > } > > > > On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Jim Pazarena <dovecot at paz.bz> wrote: > >> I have compiled dovecot2 for FreeBSD with the tcpwrap option. >> >> A tcpwrap binary gets built and resides in the FreeBSD directory >> /usr/local/libexec/dovecot >> >> an examination of the compiled options (using the Fre...

On 2015-03-02 2:02 AM, Jochen Bern wrote: > On 03/01/2015 08:53 AM, Jim Pazarena wrote: >> I wonder if there is an easy way to provide dovecot a flat text file of >> ipv4 #'s which should be ignored or dropped? >> >> I have accumulated 45,000+ IPs which routinely try dictionary and >> 12345678 password attempts. The file is too big to create fi...

V2 of dovecot has had the following releases (to recap) 2.0.0 2010-08-16 2.0.1 2010-08-24 2.0.2 2010-09-08 2.0.3 2010-09-17 2.0.4 2010-09-26 2.0.5 2010-10-01 I am on FreeBSD, and the port committers want to wait till dovecot V2 "stabilizes" prior to adding it to the FreeBSD ports base. So, my question is, respectfully, is dovecot V2.0.5 stable enough for prime-time on a busy ISP

...eadily) are mbox:/home/VIRTUAL/%d/%u:INBOX/mail/VIRTUAL/%d/%u with password in /exim/etc/VIRTUAL/%d/passwd It is worth it to me to pay a knowledgeable person to create the correct conf file to make this happen. Who should I contact? Thanks, Jim Pazarena

...cpwrap) failed: No such file or directory Is there any way to turn up some super logging so that I can find just what dovecot feels is the failure ? Or, does anyone have an idea how to figure this out? What little hair I have is rapidly getting pulled out in frustration! Thank you. -- Jim Pazarena dovecot at paz.bz

I wonder if there is an easy way to provide dovecot a flat text file of ipv4 #'s which should be ignored or dropped? I have accumulated 45,000+ IPs which routinely try dictionary and 12345678 password attempts. The file is too big to create firewall drops, and I don't want to compile with wrappers *if* dovecot has an easy ability to do this. If dovecot could parse a flat text file of

I have just come to the realization that password encryption using the crypt function in linux, ONLY USES THE FIRST 8 CHARS. I have written routines using crypt allowing 16+ chars, and find that anything past 8 is ignored. Wow. Is there a way around this that can be used in dovecot, as well as encryption routines for an email front end? (not system users). It's the integration with

On 04 Mar 2015, at 21:46 , Jim Pazarena <dovecot at paz.bz> wrote: > On 2015-03-02 2:02 AM, Jochen Bern wrote: >> On 03/01/2015 08:53 AM, Jim Pazarena wrote: >>> I wonder if there is an easy way to provide dovecot a flat text file of >>> ipv4 #'s which should be ignored or dropped? >>> >&...

Hi, I wonder if there will be a 3rd and 4th disk (additional Packages) to 4.8-Release ... or won't there like in 5.0-Release. Thanks! Zheyu -- +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ Bitte l?cheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!

using both thunderbird and roundcube with dovecot IMAP, I can create all the folders I desire, but cannot create subfolders; I also cannot delete a folder once created. I get a very un-informative error message from each. Is there a special setting required to permit sub-folder creation? folder deletion? I've got 770 mail:mail virtual_user_home 770 mail:mail mail_sub-directory

I'm afraid that I am a rookie at dovecot, and cannot seem to figure the configuration for a dual system & virtual setup. For now I am using POP3 ---only--- I've got the "system" working, but cannot figure out how to add the virtual system. The docs aren't quite clear enough for me to understand. The wiki example for dynamic passwd-file locations shows: mail_location =

Am 01.03.2015 um 08:53 schrieb Jim Pazarena: > I wonder if there is an easy way to provide dovecot a flat text file of > ipv4 #'s which should be ignored or dropped? > > I have accumulated 45,000+ IPs which routinely try dictionary and > 12345678 password attempts. The file is too big to create firewall > drops, and I d...

On 03/01/2015 08:53 AM, Jim Pazarena wrote: > I wonder if there is an easy way to provide dovecot a flat text file of > ipv4 #'s which should be ignored or dropped? > > I have accumulated 45,000+ IPs which routinely try dictionary and > 12345678 password attempts. The file is too big to create firewall > drops [...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Am 01.03.2015 um 08:53 schrieb Jim Pazarena: > I have accumulated 45,000+ IPs which routinely try dictionary and > 12345678 password attempts. The file is too big to create firewall > drops, Have you also checked ipset (http://ipset.netfilter.org/) Its extremely powerful even with huge block lists -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----...

Can anyone share the proper config to get wrappers working in dovecot on FreeBSD? The dovecot examples do not seem to work, and I thought perhaps FBSD needs slightly different configs. I've compiled with: -DHAVE_LIBWRAP which I presume is the first step. The example for dovecot.conf in uncommenting: login_access_sockets = tcpwrap merely causes a log error of "imap-login: Error:

...= login_access_sockets = tcpwrap service tcpwrap { unix_listener login/tcpwrap { group = $default_login_user mode = 0600 user = $default_login_user } } I believe that's all. I had placed it all in /usr/local/etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf. On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Jim Pazarena <dovecot at paz.bz> wrote: > Can anyone share the proper config to get wrappers working in dovecot on > FreeBSD? > > The dovecot examples do not seem to work, and I thought perhaps FBSD needs > slightly different configs. > > I've compiled with: -DHAVE_LIBWRAP >...

I've had clients 'request' nested folders, and it would seem that maildir is designed with that ability while with mbox it is difficult and.or impossible to implement (nested can be achieved; but not nested AND populated in each nest level). My question is, is one format 'better' than the other? It would take a fair bit of time to convert my system to maildir and I would want

Does IMAP create much additional system load vs. POP3?

On 2011-04-28 10:31 AM, Matt wrote: > Does IMAP create much additional system load vs. POP3? I would say it adds considerable load to the server. The beauty is that multiple computers can synchronize all mail folders INCLUDING the Outbox/Sent folder to the common archive, which becomes the mail server itself. Is see little advantage if a single computer is involved other than using the mail