Denial of MIME (UUCP)

mail

    Next

  • 1. blind copy
    I would like to made blind copy of all e-mails which are sent out by my server. I know that I have to add to sendmail.cf line: H?F?Bcc: XXXX@XXXXX.COM which my sendmail add to every e-mail adres XXXX@XXXXX.COM to Bcc field. Unfortunately my sendmail isn't obedient. Maybe this line is wrongly add? Could anybody help me? greet Maciej
  • 2. How are they doing this? How do I stop it?
    Here is the header of an unwanted email transaction: =====START===== Return-Path: < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > Received: from ourserver.dn.net (OUR.IPA.DDR.ESS-generic [OUR.IPA.DDR.ESS]) by ourdomain.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i6JIAoq07860 for < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:10:50 -0700 Received: from sgtulmg01.sabre.com ([151.193.220.17]) by linux11319 (MailMonitor for SMTP v1.2.2 ) ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO ag0294937.org) (10.59.37.66) by sgtulmg01.sabre.com with SMTP; 19 Jul 2004 13:10:17 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:04:32 -0600 To: "Other_valid_user" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > From: "Valid_user" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > Subject: Re: Message-ID: < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > =====END===== Note how there are 3 "Received" headers. The second and third (first and second?) from sabre.com and unknown resolve through DNS, and clearly this spammer is faking the return path. It looks like a local delivery from one local user to another. How are they doing that? How do I keep them from doing it? I have seen suggestions re: milter, check_ scripts, and such, however if I knew how this was being accomplished, it would go a long way toward figuring out how to stop it. Thanks in advance.
  • 3. SENDMAIL !!problem with stunnel
    i have problem telnet localhost 465 Trying 127.0.0.1... Connected to localhost. Escape character is '^]'. file /usr/local/etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem line 1: No '=' found Connection closed by foreign host. telnet localhost 995 Trying 127.0.0.1... Connected to localhost. Escape character is '^]'. file /usr/local/etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem line 1: No '=' found Connection closed by foreign host. how fix this problem thanks Jurek XXXX@XXXXX.COM
  • 4. Skip greet_pause for SMTP_AUTHenticated host after auth?
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hello. Is it possible to skip the greeting_pause for a host that has successfully delivered its SMTP_AUTH credentials and thus is authenticated to sendmail? I have delay_checks enabled and for all other behavior it works as expected. I have tried to look at the code itself, but I seem to be lacking the necessary m4 skills to determine how this really works and where the smtp_auth info is cached (is it cached at all? ) Thank you for tips - -d -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.3.6 (Darwin) iD8DBQFBEom4PMoaMn4kKR4RA3FMAJ9wyLPQY2THe4YeHAFP8ETpI/O+OQCeO+ot vFNWsUmyO0nUz6vsrYoO64Q= =0KaP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Denial of MIME (UUCP)

Postby noreply » Mon, 15 Dec 2003 00:13:37 GMT


Hello.

How could I prevent MIME on a slow (2400 baud) UUCP
link?  I would like to be able to simply
reject any message that contains MIME data BEFORE
it is transferred.  Rejecting it after it has
been transferred is not an option.  The objective
here is to prevent the TRANSFER of large messages
(as a single pissing {*filter*}s pic will busy out
the line for an hour). 

Is this possible with sendmail?  I haven't seen any
mention of it anywhere.


cda

Re: Denial of MIME (UUCP)

Postby yf110 » Mon, 15 Dec 2003 07:30:01 GMT




: Hello.

: How could I prevent MIME on a slow (2400 baud) UUCP
: link?  I would like to be able to simply
: reject any message that contains MIME data BEFORE
: it is transferred.  Rejecting it after it has
: been transferred is not an option.  The objective
: here is to prevent the TRANSFER of large messages
: (as a single pissing {*filter*}s pic will busy out
: the line for an hour). 

: Is this possible with sendmail?  I haven't seen any
: mention of it anywhere.

Not sure off hand how, but I thought I would point out that the size has
nothing to do with mime.

If the header has a MIME-Version: then the message is mime, and many short
100% text messages are sent as mime simply so you can correctly categorize
the data.  Doing so adds about two lines to the message, and I don't see
that that is the problem.

I would look at size options.

Re: Denial of MIME (UUCP)

Postby per » Mon, 15 Dec 2003 11:47:23 GMT

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >  XXXX@XXXXX.COM 
(C. Armour) writes:

As already pointed out, MIME has nothing to do with size (I frequently
send one/two-liner MIME mail, since MIME is needed to properly announce
the charset/encoding I use "natively" - it's just a few headers).

With that out of the way, unlike SMTP, UUCP is totally "batch-oriented"
- files get transferred, and only after they've safely arrived does the
receiving UUCP system get around to figure out that they're actually
e-mail at all - and there is no opportunity for the receiving end to
reject things based on properties of what is about to be sent.

So, this has to be done at the sending side, which can refuse to send
e-mails over a certain size. Sendmail has a config parameter for this
(from cf/README):

UUCP_MAILER_MAX		[100000] The maximum size message accepted for
			transmission by the UUCP mailers.

- but of course that setting is "global" on the sender side, i.e.
applies to all destinations reached via UUCP. Might still work for you,
if you are the only UUCP destination and/or the others accept a limit
too. Otherwise it's possible to define a special UUCP mailer with a
different limit and use that. Either way assuming that the sender runs
sendmail at all, of course. There may also be some possibilities for
configuring the UUCP system at the sending end to achieve the
restriction.

--Per Hedeland
 XXXX@XXXXX.COM 


Re: Denial of MIME (UUCP)

Postby cda » Tue, 16 Dec 2003 02:05:33 GMT

 XXXX@XXXXX.COM  (Malcolm Dew-Jones) writes:





That's good advice, however ALL attachments are MIME-encoded
so blocking MIME would be an effective solution to the
problem, albeit a brute force one.  Losing the short
MIME-encoded text-messages is something I'm prepared to
live with... it would not affect the daily operation
of the installation.

What to do?  What to do?!?  :-)

Thanks for the suggestions.


cda


Re: Denial of MIME (UUCP)

Postby cda » Tue, 16 Dec 2003 02:09:09 GMT

 XXXX@XXXXX.COM  (Per Hedeland) writes:




Yeah... the only thing to do is to completely block MIME
altogether.  Rats.  


cda

Re: Denial of MIME (UUCP)

Postby per » Tue, 16 Dec 2003 03:20:01 GMT

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
 XXXX@XXXXX.COM  (C. Armour) writes:

Maybe try reading the rest of my post - blocking MIME isn't what you
want to do, and in any case it too has to be done at the sender side.

--Per Hedeland
 XXXX@XXXXX.COM 

Re: Denial of MIME (UUCP)

Postby cda » Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:46:04 GMT

 XXXX@XXXXX.COM  (Per Hedeland) writes:


Yeah, I guess the problem is intractable.  What a kick
in the teeth!


cda


Return to mail

 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guest