Questions[dsn](server)

This is a stock OS X 5.2 Server mail configuration which I'm trying to change to make it reject a spam message with a "554 5.7.0 Reject" before accepting it without sending out any additional non-delivery notifications to the sender. It's configured to accept spam with a "250 2.7.0 Ok" and later discard or quarantine it out of the box. That is usually done with

$final_spam_destiny       = D_REJECT;
$warnspamsender = 0; (probably not necessary)

and can be fine-tuned using

$sa_dsn_cutoff_level = X;
$sa_crediblefrom_dsn_cutoff_level = X;

The problem I'm having is that despite those cutoff levels being way less than the actual spam score for a particular message, the DSN/bounce still gets through. It looks like this:

Oct 25 11:52:18 mailbox postfix/smtpd[52962]: 1CD504D13C96: client=mail.informark.co.ua[85.25.13.92]
Oct 25 11:52:18 mailbox postfix/cleanup[53010]: 1CD504D13C96: message-id=<11a201d22e97$126f7740$2adb3d4f@ynmyfnj>
Oct 25 11:52:19 mailbox postfix/qmgr[52740]: 1CD504D13C96: from=<[email protected]>, size=145530, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Oct 25 11:52:20 mailbox postfix/smtp[53011]: 1CD504D13C96: to=<[email protected]>, relay=127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024, delay=2.2, delays=1.1/0/0.02/1, dsn=5.7.0, status=bounced (host 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] said: 554 5.7.0 Reject, id=52765-01 - spam (in reply to end of DATA command))
Oct 25 11:52:20 mailbox postfix/bounce[53022]: 1CD504D13C96: sender non-delivery notification: 4B9804D13CB0
Oct 25 11:52:20 mailbox postfix/qmgr[52740]: 1CD504D13C96: removed

Oct 25 11:52:20 mailbox postfix/cleanup[53010]: 4B9804D13CB0: message-id=<[email protected]>
Oct 25 11:52:20 mailbox postfix/qmgr[52740]: 4B9804D13CB0: from=<>, size=3019, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Oct 25 11:52:20 mailbox postfix/bounce[53022]: 1CD504D13C96: sender non-delivery notification: 4B9804D13CB0
Oct 25 11:52:20 mailbox postfix/smtp[53015]: 4B9804D13CB0: to=<[email protected]>, relay=mail.informark.co.ua[85.25.13.92]:25, delay=0.58, delays=0/0/0.26/0.32, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 9145D8C8CCC)
Oct 25 11:52:20 mailbox postfix/qmgr[52740]: 4B9804D13CB0: removed

and the relevant part from amavis.log (debug level 5) looks like so:

lookup [forward_method] => true,  "[email protected]" matches, result="smtp:[127.0.0.1]:10025", matching_key="(opaque:smtp:[127.0.0.1]:10025)"
delivery method is 1, recips: [email protected]
get_deadline quar+notif - deadline in 479.0 s, set to 288.000 s
prolong_timer quar+notif: timer 288, was 288, deadline in 479.0 s
DSN: sender NOT credible, SA: 15.417, <[email protected]>
lookup: (scalar) matches, result="-100"
lookup [spam_dsn_cutoff_level_bysender] => true,  "[email protected]" matches, result="-100", matching_key="(constant:-100)"
dsn: . 554 Spam <[email protected]> -> <[email protected]>: on_succ=0, on_dly=1, on_fail=1, never=0, warn_sender=, DSN_passed_on=, destiny=-3, mta_resp: "554 5.7.0 Reject, id=52765-01 - spam"
DSN: FAIL . 554 Spam, status propagated back: <[email protected]> -> <[email protected]>
delivery_status_notification: notif 0 bytes, suppressed: no
one_response_for_all, per_recip_capable: N, suppressed: N
one_response_for_all <[email protected]>: REJECTs, '554 5.7.0 Reject, id=52765-01 - spam'
notif=N, suppressed=0, ndn_needed=, exit=69, 554 5.7.0 Reject, id=52765-01 - spam
get_deadline delivery-notification - deadline in 479.0 s, set to 288.000 s
prolong_timer delivery-notification: timer 288, was 288, deadline in 479.0 s
status counters: InMsgsStatus{Rejected,RejectedInbound}
get_deadline snmp-counters - deadline in 479.0 s, set to 288.000 s
prolong_timer snmp-counters: timer 288, was 288, deadline in 479.0 s
orcpt_encode rfc822, [email protected], smtputf8
oldest_public_ip_addr_from_received: 178.17.170.60
Blocked SPAM {RejectedInbound}, [85.25.13.92]:44462 [178.17.170.60] <[email protected]> -> <[email protected]>, Queue-ID: 1CD504D13C96, Message-ID: <11a201d22e97$126f7740$2adb3d4f@ynmyfnj>, mail_id: N0710n9hpdxw, Hits: 15.417, size: 145530, 1021 ms
get_deadline main_log_entry - deadline in 479.0 s, set to 288.000 s
prolong_timer main_log_entry: timer 288, was 288, deadline in 479.0 s
TIMING-SA total 817 ms - parse: 8 (1.0%), extract_message_metadata: 55 (6.7%), get_uri_detail_list: 1.42 (0.2%), tests_pri_-1000: 32 (3.9%), tests_pri_-950: 1.05 (0.1%), tests_pri_-900: 1.13 (0.1%), tests_pri_-400: 26 (3.1%), check_bayes: 24 (2.9%), b_tokenize: 11 (1.3%), b_tok_get_all: 3.5 (0.4%), b_comp_prob: 4.4 (0.5%), b_tok_touch_all: 0.80 (0.1%), b_finish: 1.12 (0.1%), tests_pri_0: 665 (81.4%), check_dkim_adsp: 479 (58.6%), check_spf: 43 (5.3%), poll_dns_idle: 0.28 (0.0%), check_pyzor: 0.25 (0.0%), tests_pri_500: 5 (0.7%), get_report: 0.77 (0.1%)
updating snmp variables in BDB
get_deadline check done - deadline in 479.0 s, set to 288.000 s
prolong_timer check done: timer 288, was 288, deadline in 479.0 s
sending SMTP response: "554 5.7.0 Reject, id=52765-01 - spam"
ESMTP> 554 5.7.0 Reject, id=52765-01 - spam
...
ESMTP< QUIT\r\n
...
ESMTP> 221 2.0.0 [127.0.0.1] amavisd-new closing transmission channel

As a result despite explicitly telling amavis/postfix NOT to send out a bounce to a faked email address and even amavis acknowledging my wish there, the bounces still get sent out. I presume the key in the logs is the word "suppressed" which is "no" and "0" instead of "yes" and "1" as I have seen in the amavis logs elsewhere on the internet.

So the question is what I'm doing wrong and whether there could be something else interfering with the setup and I'd also like to know the best way to debug this. Obviously the statements in the amavis log are contradictory.

I'm working on building a feature for a larger system that will be able to parse and react to dsn bounce messages received from all different types of smtp servers.

It be great to test the code I write by reading a bunch of txt files containing examples of the types of bounce messages that might be encountered out in the wild ;-)

Anyone have any suggestions on where to find a bunch of test dsn messages lying around? Or any thoughts on how to create some good test data?

UPDATE: I found a ton of good test data inside this project: https://github.com/rjbs/mail-deliverystatus-bounceparser/tree/master/t/corpus

I'm trying to create a connection to an SQL Server database from the ODBC Data Source Administrator using "Windows NT authentication using the network login ID". Both server and client are running Windows XP.

It appears that any account with administrator privileges can add the data source on the server*, though connection attempts from the client result in error messages that suggest it is trying to authenticate using a guest account.

I found a Microsoft support page that says:

For SQL Server...: connect using the impersonated user account.

But it doesn't offer advice about how to do that.

How do I impersonate a user account on the server?

or (since it sounds like that would lead to an unfortuante squashing of privileges and loss of accountability):

How do I give an account on the client privileges on the server database and then ensure the client attempts authentication with the privileged account and not with a guest account?

I'm aware that I'm providing rather sparse information. This is because I'm in unfamiliar territory and don't know what's pertinent. I'll attempt to add any requested information as quickly as possible.

*I'm planning on tightening privileges straight after I get it working as it stands.

My sendmail server started rejecting connections because load average was too high (due to a spam issue that has since been resolved).

Error was: sendmail[13400]: rejecting connections on daemon MTA: load average: 50

I'd like to understand this behavior better though.

• Where is this threshold set?
• What does "load average" mean?
• How often is load average calculated?
• Is there a way to proactively monitor this? Or becoming alerted when load average approaches a high value? Obviously sendmail will give a 4.0.0 class dsn to the connecting MTA but I was homing for some sort of alert mechanism.

Thanks,

M

Hi Guys,

I thought I'd bump this one more time as I saw it come up again. The issue I'm now seeing is that messages that are queued due to exceeding load average don't get resent later (even after performance returns to acceptable levels. Any idea why this could be?

Thanks,

M

I have a colleague who has two DSNs with the same name - one's a user DSN and the other, a system one. He removed the user DSN but can't remove the system DSN in ODBCad32

Anybody encountered this before?