Discussion:
Multi Depth Rules
Jerry Benton
2013-05-07 21:58:38 UTC
Permalink
I am creating the structure for "Scan Messages" and am wondering if anyone
has tested this. I am using the MailScanner file name rules structure as a
basis, which looks like this:

---
*Filename Rules = %etc-dir%/frules/filename.rules:*
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/frules/domain.com.fn.conf

When you look at the contents domain.com.fn.conf, it contains the rules for
that domain. This setup does work.
---


So, what I am looking to do now is the same thing for "Scan Messages".

---
*Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules*
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf

*domain.com.scan.conf*
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
---


Has anyone tested this? It is basically a structure 2 levels deep instead
of 1.
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130507/5f1fa652/attachment.html
Mike Tremaine
2013-05-07 22:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Jerry,

I just tried this back thread a bit and it doesn't work sadly. It would be cool but alas it gives you a config error. Might be worth hacking at someday.

-Mike
---
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/frules/domain.com.fn.conf
When you look at the contents domain.com.fn.conf, it contains the rules for that domain. This setup does work.
---
So, what I am looking to do now is the same thing for "Scan Messages".
---
Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf
domain.com.scan.conf
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
---
Has anyone tested this? It is basically a structure 2 levels deep instead of 1.
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130507/6070b5f3/attachment.html
Jerry Benton
2013-05-07 23:14:09 UTC
Permalink
Thanks Mike. I will play with it more later when I get to that part. In
short, I am creating templates in a web GUI for the next version of
Mailborder. This is part of the passthru template. I may have to make this
a server setting rather than a domain setting. I know that will work.
Post by Mike Tremaine
Jerry,
I just tried this back thread a bit and it doesn't work sadly. It would
be cool but alas it gives you a config error. Might be worth hacking at
someday.
-Mike
I am creating the structure for "Scan Messages" and am wondering if anyone
has tested this. I am using the MailScanner file name rules structure as a
---
*Filename Rules = %etc-dir%/frules/filename.rules:*
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/frules/domain.com.fn.conf
When you look at the contents domain.com.fn.conf, it contains the rules
for that domain. This setup does work.
---
So, what I am looking to do now is the same thing for "Scan Messages".
---
*Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules*
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf
*domain.com.scan.conf*
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
---
Has anyone tested this? It is basically a structure 2 levels deep instead of 1.
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130508/84985419/attachment.html
Peter Bonivart
2013-05-08 07:52:18 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jerry Benton
Post by Jerry Benton
Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf
domain.com.scan.conf
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
Wouldn't "From: pain.customer.com And To: domain.com no" do the same thing?
Jerry Benton
2013-05-08 08:41:24 UTC
Permalink
No. The scan.messages.rules would define the file to use for rules for
domain.com. (domain.com.scan.conf) The file then specifies each rule for
that domain. In this case, the domain pain.customer.com would not be
scanned if the destination was domain.com.

However, according to Mike's results this does not work the same for the
setting "Scan Messages" as it does for filename and filetype rules.
Post by Peter Bonivart
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jerry Benton
Post by Jerry Benton
Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf
domain.com.scan.conf
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
Wouldn't "From: pain.customer.com And To: domain.com no" do the same thing?
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130508/8e7fe84e/attachment.html
Peter Bonivart
2013-05-08 09:15:51 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Jerry Benton
In this case, the domain pain.customer.com would not be scanned
if the destination was domain.com.
Isn't that exactly what my line would do?
Jerry Benton
2013-05-08 11:30:29 UTC
Permalink
Use operands. Good point.
Post by Peter Bonivart
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Jerry Benton
In this case, the domain pain.customer.com would not be scanned
if the destination was domain.com.
Isn't that exactly what my line would do?
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130508/71da506b/attachment.html
f immenroth
2013-06-07 06:32:58 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

we have a Problem with our MailScanner / Postfix system.
When I send a mail to T1485 at domain.com the address will be changed
after processing to t1485 at domain.com .
Since the receiving system is requesting case sensitive addresses (and
so defined in RFC) what have i to change for not rewriting the mail
addresses?

Thank you

Florian

Log-Output:
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: C5226107EF9: hold:
header Received: from groupwise.skbs.de (groupwise2.serverskbs.de
[192.168.12.169])??by mailproxy.serverskbs.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id
C5226107EF9??for <T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de>; Fri, 7 Jun 20
from groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169];
from=<f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de>
to=<T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de> proto=ESMTP
helo=<groupwise.skbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: C5226107EF9:
message-id=<51B198C20200007D00037F85 at groupwise.skbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/smtpd[24004]: disconnect from
groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169]
Jun 7 08:24:40 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: New Batch: Scanning 1
messages, 1433 bytes
Jun 7 08:24:40 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Filename Checks: Allowing
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 msg-24012-1.txt
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Filetype Checks: Allowing
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 msg-24012-1.txt (no match found)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus and Content
Scanning: Starting
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus Scanning completed
at 2563 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Spam Checks: Starting
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Message C5226107EF9.AA8A5
from 192.168.12.169 (f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de) is
whitelisted
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Spam Checks completed at
616898 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Requeue:
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 to 97AA1107F06
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 97AA1107F06:
from=<f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de>, size=603, nrcpt=1 (queue
active)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Uninfected: Delivered 1
messages
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus Processing
completed at 176088 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Deleted 1 messages from
processing-database
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Batch completed at 2404
bytes per second (1433 / 0)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Batch (1 message)
processed in 0.60 seconds
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/smtp[24026]: 97AA1107F06:
to=<t1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de>,
relay=172.16.60.75[172.16.60.75]:25, delay=5.8, delays=5.7/0/0.01/0.02,
dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced (host 172.16.60.75[172.16.60.75] said: 553
Requested action not taken: mailbox name not allowed (in reply to RCPT
TO command))
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Logging message
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 to SQL
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24015]: C5226107EF9.AA8A5: Logged
to MailWatch SQL
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: 89149107EF9:
message-id=<20130607062441.89149107EF9 at mailproxy.serverskbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: "Always Looked Up Last"
took 0.01 seconds
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 89149107EF9: from=<>,
size=3064, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/bounce[24129]: 97AA1107F06: sender
non-delivery notification: 89149107EF9
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 97AA1107F06: removed
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/smtp[24026]: 89149107EF9:
to=<f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de>,
relay=192.168.12.169[192.168.12.169]:25, delay=0.03,
delays=0.02/0/0/0.01, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 Ok)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 89149107EF9: removed

St?dtisches Klinikum Braunschweig gGmbH
Freisestr. 9/10, 38118 Braunschweig
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Dipl.-Kfm. Helmut Sch?ttig
Aufsichtsrat: Ulrich Markurth, Vorsitzender
Amtsgericht Braunschweig, HRB 9319
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130607/88ff9623/attachment.html
Jerry Benton
2013-06-07 07:54:17 UTC
Permalink
I believe this is actually an MTA ( postfix) issue and not MailScanner.
There is a lot of info out there in groups where this has been discussed.

On a similar note, I stick with all lower case addresses. While RFC
compliant, not everything out there is compliant and could cause issues
outside of your enclave.
Post by f immenroth
Hello,
we have a Problem with our MailScanner / Postfix system.
When I send a mail to T1485 at domain.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'T1485 at domain.com');> the address will be changed after processing to
t1485 at domain.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 't1485 at domain.com');> .
Since the receiving system is requesting case sensitive addresses (and so
defined in RFC) what have i to change for not rewriting the mail addresses?
Thank you
Florian
header Received: from groupwise.skbs.de (groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169])??by
mailproxy.serverskbs.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5226107EF9??for <
T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de');>>; Fri, 7 Jun 20 from
groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169]; from=<
f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de');>> to=<
T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de');>> proto=ESMTP helo=<
groupwise.skbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: C5226107EF9: message-id=<
51B198C20200007D00037F85 at groupwise.skbs.de <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'51B198C20200007D00037F85 at groupwise.skbs.de');>>
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/smtpd[24004]: disconnect from
groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169]
Jun 7 08:24:40 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: New Batch: Scanning 1
messages, 1433 bytes
Jun 7 08:24:40 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Filename Checks: Allowing
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 msg-24012-1.txt
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Filetype Checks: Allowing
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 msg-24012-1.txt (no match found)
Starting
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus Scanning completed at
2563 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Spam Checks: Starting
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Message C5226107EF9.AA8A5
from 192.168.12.169 (f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de');>)
is whitelisted
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Spam Checks completed at
616898 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Requeue: C5226107EF9.AA8A5
to 97AA1107F06
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 97AA1107F06: from=<
f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de');>>, size=603, nrcpt=1 (queue
active)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Uninfected: Delivered 1
messages
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus Processing completed
at 176088 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Deleted 1 messages from
processing-database
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Batch completed at 2404
bytes per second (1433 / 0)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Batch (1 message) processed
in 0.60 seconds
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/smtp[24026]: 97AA1107F06: to=<
t1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
't1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de');>>,
relay=172.16.60.75[172.16.60.75]:25, delay=5.8, delays=5.7/0/0.01/0.02,
dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced (host 172.16.60.75[172.16.60.75] said: 553
Requested action not taken: mailbox name not allowed (in reply to RCPT TO
command))
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Logging message
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 to SQL
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24015]: C5226107EF9.AA8A5: Logged to
MailWatch SQL
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: 89149107EF9: message-id=<
20130607062441.89149107EF9 at mailproxy.serverskbs.de <javascript:_e({},
'cvml', '20130607062441.89149107EF9 at mailproxy.serverskbs.de');>>
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: "Always Looked Up Last" took
0.01 seconds
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 89149107EF9: from=<>,
size=3064, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/bounce[24129]: 97AA1107F06: sender
non-delivery notification: 89149107EF9
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 97AA1107F06: removed
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/smtp[24026]: 89149107EF9: to=<
f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de');>>,
relay=192.168.12.169[192.168.12.169]:25, delay=0.03, delays=0.02/0/0/0.01,
dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 Ok)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 89149107EF9: removed
St?dtisches Klinikum Braunschweig gGmbH
Freisestr. 9/10, 38118 Braunschweig
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Dipl.-Kfm. Helmut Sch?ttig
Aufsichtsrat: Ulrich Markurth, Vorsitzender
Amtsgericht Braunschweig, HRB 9319
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130607/394dd016/attachment.html
f immenroth
2013-06-07 11:22:30 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

i finally found the problem after some searching in the internet.

The error is located in MailScanner. After changing all lines with
"{to}" in it in /usr/lib/MailScanner/MailScanner/Postfix.pm from

push @{$message->{to}}, lc($recdata);

to

push @{$message->{to}}, $recdata;

the mailadress is unchanged.

Regards
Florian
Jerry Benton <jerry.benton at mailborder.com> schrieb am 07.06.2013 um
09:54:

I believe this is actually an MTA ( postfix) issue and not MailScanner.
There is a lot of info out there in groups where this has been
discussed.

On a similar note, I stick with all lower case addresses. While RFC
compliant, not everything out there is compliant and could cause issues
outside of your enclave.


On Friday, June 7, 2013, f immenroth wrote:


Hello,
we have a Problem with our MailScanner / Postfix system.
When I send a mail to T1485 at domain.com the address will be changed
after processing to t1485 at domain.com .
Since the receiving system is requesting case sensitive addresses (and
so defined in RFC) what have i to change for not rewriting the mail
addresses?
Thank you
Florian
Log-Output:
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: C5226107EF9: hold:
header Received: from groupwise.skbs.de (groupwise2.serverskbs.de
[192.168.12.169])??by mailproxy.serverskbs.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id
C5226107EF9??for <T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de>; Fri, 7 Jun 20
from groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169];
from=<f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de>
to=<T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de> proto=ESMTP
helo=<groupwise.skbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: C5226107EF9:
message-id=<51B198C20200007D00037F85 at groupwise.skbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/smtpd[24004]: disconnect from
groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169]
Jun 7 08:24:40 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: New Batch: Scanning 1
messages, 1433 bytes
Jun 7 08:24:40 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Filename Checks: Allowing
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 msg-24012-1.txt
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Filetype Checks: Allowing
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 msg-24012-1.txt (no match found)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus and Content
Scanning: Starting
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus Scanning completed
at 2563 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Spam Checks: Starting
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Message C5226107EF9.AA8A5
from 192.168.12.169 (f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de) is
whitelisted
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Spam Checks completed at
616898 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Requeue: C5226107EF9.AA8A5
to 97AA1107F06
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 97AA1107F06:
from=<f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de>, size=603, nrcpt=1 (queue
active)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Uninfected: Delivered 1
messages
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus Processing completed
at 176088 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Deleted 1 messages from
processing-database
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Batch completed at 2404
bytes per second (1433 / 0)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Batch (1 message)
processed in 0.60 seconds
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/smtp[24026]: 97AA1107F06:
to=<t1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de>,
relay=172.16.60.75[172.16.60.75]:25, delay=5.8, delays=5.7/0/0.01/0.02,
dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced (host 172.16.60.75[172.16.60.75] said: 553
Requested action not taken: mailbox name not allowed (in reply to RCPT
TO command))
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Logging message
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 to SQL
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24015]: C5226107EF9.AA8A5: Logged
to MailWatch SQL
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: 89149107EF9:
message-id=<20130607062441.89149107EF9 at mailproxy.serverskbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: "Always Looked Up Last"
took 0.01 seconds
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 89149107EF9: from=<>,
size=3064, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/bounce[24129]: 97AA1107F06: sender
non-delivery notification: 89149107EF9
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 97AA1107F06: removed
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/smtp[24026]: 89149107EF9:
to=<f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de>,
relay=192.168.12.169[192.168.12.169]:25, delay=0.03,
delays=0.02/0/0/0.01, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 Ok)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 89149107EF9: removed


St?dtisches Klinikum Braunschweig gGmbH
Freisestr. 9/10, 38118 Braunschweig
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Dipl.-Kfm. Helmut Sch?ttig
Aufsichtsrat: Ulrich Markurth, Vorsitzender
Amtsgericht Braunschweig, HRB 9319
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com


St?dtisches Klinikum Braunschweig gGmbH
Freisestr. 9/10, 38118 Braunschweig
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Dipl.-Kfm. Helmut Sch?ttig
Aufsichtsrat: Ulrich Markurth, Vorsitzender
Amtsgericht Braunschweig, HRB 9319
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130607/084fe816/attachment.html
Jerry Benton
2013-06-07 12:20:42 UTC
Permalink
Ah... good to know. I was not aware of that "feature".


On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:22 PM, f immenroth <
Post by f immenroth
Hi,
i finally found the problem after some searching in the internet.
The error is located in MailScanner. After changing all lines with "{to}"
in it in /usr/lib/MailScanner/MailScanner/Postfix.pm from
to
the mailadress is unchanged.
Regards
Florian
Post by f immenroth
Jerry Benton <jerry.benton at mailborder.com> schrieb am 07.06.2013 um
I believe this is actually an MTA ( postfix) issue and not MailScanner.
There is a lot of info out there in groups where this has been discussed.
On a similar note, I stick with all lower case addresses. While RFC
compliant, not everything out there is compliant and could cause issues
outside of your enclave.
Post by f immenroth
Hello,
we have a Problem with our MailScanner / Postfix system.
When I send a mail to T1485 at domain.com the address will be changed after
processing to t1485 at domain.com .
Since the receiving system is requesting case sensitive addresses (and so
defined in RFC) what have i to change for not rewriting the mail addresses?
Thank you
Florian
header Received: from groupwise.skbs.de (groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169])??by
mailproxy.serverskbs.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5226107EF9??for <
T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de>; Fri, 7 Jun 20 from
groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169]; from=<
f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de> to=<
T1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de> proto=ESMTP helo=<groupwise.skbs.de
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: C5226107EF9: message-id=<
51B198C20200007D00037F85 at groupwise.skbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:35 mailproxy postfix/smtpd[24004]: disconnect from
groupwise2.serverskbs.de[192.168.12.169]
Jun 7 08:24:40 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: New Batch: Scanning 1
messages, 1433 bytes
Jun 7 08:24:40 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Filename Checks: Allowing
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 msg-24012-1.txt
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Filetype Checks: Allowing
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 msg-24012-1.txt (no match found)
Starting
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus Scanning completed at
2563 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Spam Checks: Starting
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Message C5226107EF9.AA8A5
from 192.168.12.169 (f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de) is whitelisted
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Spam Checks completed at
616898 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Requeue: C5226107EF9.AA8A5
to 97AA1107F06
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 97AA1107F06: from=<
f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de>, size=603, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Uninfected: Delivered 1
messages
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Virus Processing completed
at 176088 bytes per second
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Deleted 1 messages from
processing-database
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Batch completed at 2404
bytes per second (1433 / 0)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Batch (1 message) processed
in 0.60 seconds
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/smtp[24026]: 97AA1107F06: to=<
t1485 at oscar.klinikum-braunschweig.de>,
relay=172.16.60.75[172.16.60.75]:25, delay=5.8, delays=5.7/0/0.01/0.02,
dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced (host 172.16.60.75[172.16.60.75] said: 553
Requested action not taken: mailbox name not allowed (in reply to RCPT TO
command))
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: Logging message
C5226107EF9.AA8A5 to SQL
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24015]: C5226107EF9.AA8A5: Logged to
MailWatch SQL
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/cleanup[24006]: 89149107EF9: message-id=<
20130607062441.89149107EF9 at mailproxy.serverskbs.de>
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy MailScanner[24012]: "Always Looked Up Last" took
0.01 seconds
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 89149107EF9: from=<>,
size=3064, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/bounce[24129]: 97AA1107F06: sender
non-delivery notification: 89149107EF9
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 97AA1107F06: removed
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/smtp[24026]: 89149107EF9: to=<
f.immenroth at klinikum-braunschweig.de>,
relay=192.168.12.169[192.168.12.169]:25, delay=0.03, delays=0.02/0/0/0.01,
dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 Ok)
Jun 7 08:24:41 mailproxy postfix/qmgr[5855]: 89149107EF9: removed
St?dtisches Klinikum Braunschweig gGmbH
Freisestr. 9/10, 38118 Braunschweig
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Dipl.-Kfm. Helmut Sch?ttig
Aufsichtsrat: Ulrich Markurth, Vorsitzender
Amtsgericht Braunschweig, HRB 9319
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
St?dtisches Klinikum Braunschweig gGmbH
Freisestr. 9/10, 38118 Braunschweig
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Dipl.-Kfm. Helmut Sch?ttig
Aufsichtsrat: Ulrich Markurth, Vorsitzender
Amtsgericht Braunschweig, HRB 9319
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130607/5a4740a8/attachment.html
Stephen Cox
2013-07-09 07:10:03 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:22 PM, f immenroth <
Post by f immenroth
The error is located in MailScanner. After changing all lines with "{to}"
in it in /usr/lib/MailScanner/MailScanner/Postfix.pm from
to
the mailadress is unchanged.
Florian,

Can you file an issue on github, we can maybe add a extra config to handle
this. https://github.com/MailScanner/MailScanner/issues/new

Regards,
Stephen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130709/cf2ccbaf/attachment.html
Mogens Melander
2013-05-08 19:09:23 UTC
Permalink
I think it was:

Can recursive %file% rules be used for "Scan Messages".

If not for this rule, but for that other one, why not ?
Post by Peter Bonivart
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jerry Benton
Post by Jerry Benton
Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf
domain.com.scan.conf
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
Wouldn't "From: pain.customer.com And To: domain.com no" do the same thing?
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
Mogens Melander
+66 8701 33224
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Jerry Benton
2013-05-08 20:13:00 UTC
Permalink
I will have to test some different config options in my lab. I am sure I
can find a work around if the .rules solution does not work. I was just
curious if anyone had definitely done it already.
Post by Mogens Melander
Can recursive %file% rules be used for "Scan Messages".
If not for this rule, but for that other one, why not ?
Post by Peter Bonivart
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jerry Benton
Post by Jerry Benton
Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf
domain.com.scan.conf
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
Wouldn't "From: pain.customer.com And To: domain.com no" do the same thing?
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
Mogens Melander
+66 8701 33224
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130508/97723872/attachment.html
Rick Cooper
2013-05-08 15:01:48 UTC
Permalink
_____

From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info
[mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of Jerry
Benton
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 5:59 PM
To: MailScanner discussion
Subject: Multi Depth Rules


I am creating the structure for "Scan Messages" and am wondering if anyone
has tested this. I am using the MailScanner file name rules structure as a
basis, which looks like this:

---
Filename Rules = %etc-dir%/frules/filename.rules:

FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/frules/domain.com.fn.conf


When you look at the contents domain.com.fn.conf, it contains the rules for
that domain. This setup does work.
---


So, what I am looking to do now is the same thing for "Scan Messages".

---
Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf


domain.com.scan.conf

From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
---


It's been a while since I poked about inside mailscanner but IIRC there are
two things about rules that must be followed:
1. Must end in .rules
2. Must be in the defined %rules-dir%

Now this might not seem incorrect because the filename/type rules point to
.conf files in the etc directory but it is as they are the action same as
yes/no. If I am recalling this correctly the above should be

Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
FromOrTo: domain.com %rules-dir%/domain.com.scan.rules

domain.com.scan.rules
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes

I have not the time to test it or take a refresher look at the code but I am
pretty sure it would have to be this way to follow the parsing rules for
MailScanner to understand it was looking at a rule file

Rick




Has anyone tested this? It is basically a structure 2 levels deep instead of
1.
--
--

Jerry Benton

Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20130508/4954cf2b/attachment.html
Alex Neuman
2013-05-09 19:37:41 UTC
Permalink
I believe you should use .rules instead of .conf, for consistency. I'm
not sure if it's a requirement, though.

On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Jerry Benton
Post by Jerry Benton
I am creating the structure for "Scan Messages" and am wondering if anyone
has tested this. I am using the MailScanner file name rules structure as a
---
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/frules/domain.com.fn.conf
When you look at the contents domain.com.fn.conf, it contains the rules for
that domain. This setup does work.
---
So, what I am looking to do now is the same thing for "Scan Messages".
---
Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
FromOrTo: domain.com /etc/MailScanner/scan/domain.com.scan.conf
domain.com.scan.conf
From: pain.customer.com no
FromOrTo: default yes
---
Has anyone tested this? It is basically a structure 2 levels deep instead of
1.
--
--
Jerry Benton
Mailborder Systems
www.mailborder.com
--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
--
--

Alex Neuman van der Hans
Reliant Technologies / Vida Digital
http://vidadigital.com.pa/

+507-6781-9505
+507-832-6725
+1-440-253-9789 (USA)

Follow @AlexNeuman on Twitter
http://facebook.com/vidadigital
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...