> Yes, one could log stuff into different pflog interfaces, but I don't
> understand why pf.conf `pass in ... log ... port smtp ...` is effectively
> redefined to mean `add ` when spamlogd is running,
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=spamlogd
and RTFM for the first two sentences - and
I'm simply logging greylisted connections;
it's spamlogd that whitelists them just because they're logged.
It doesn't make sense that logging greylisted or blacklisted connections
would immediately turn them into being whitelisted by spamlogd.
Same goes for logging connections that are alread
Indeed, this is what I typically do.
and make sure I only log the real mailserver connections to pflog1,
and point spamlogd at that.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2013/03/06 13:47, Bob Beck wrote:
>> No constantine - the solution is to simply not use the "log" key
No constatine - that is not the best approach. if you are whitelisting
grelisted connections
or blacklisted connections that are blocked you have your pf.conf or
spamlogd setup wrong.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
> Bob, I agree, the hdr->rewritten approach is not
Bob, I agree, the hdr->rewritten approach is not good.
I think the best approach here would be to not add any new entries
on incoming connections in the first place, but only keep updating
the existing ones (when the connection is incoming).
In addition to not whitelisting greylisted or block
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 22:27, Sylvestre Gallon wrote:
> Do you know if miscfs is the best place to put my code ?
I think so.
> Do I keep the device code (fuse_device.c) in the same directory than the
> filesystem code?
I'd prefer that. sys/dev is kind of cluttered as it is, and since the
dev c
On 2013/03/06 13:47, Bob Beck wrote:
> No constantine - the solution is to simply not use the "log" keyword
> on such traffic
Or you can use an alternative log interface
log (to )
Send logs to the specified pflog(4) interface instead of pflog0.
No constantine - the solution is to simply not use the "log" keyword
on such traffic
All of my boxen I run this on also rewite the traffic to (pool) of
mailservers so this is
not accurate.
Simply don't log the traffic you don't want spamlogd to see. the
*point* of spamlogd
is to ensure all contin
Hi,
I've started using spamlogd, and since then, every single
connection attempt results in the host being whitelisted.
I log some `rdr-to 127.0.0.1 port spamd` connection attempts into pflog,
and it would seem like spamlogd filter (for port 25)
is picking up the original dport, not the rewr
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:05:16PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> It's not entirely obvious that "-x509" actually means "produce a
> csr, self-sign it (defaulting to SHA1), throw away the csr and write
> the cert" and this had me stuck for a long time when I wanted to
> play with DSA server certs
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 03:58:22PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 15:25:34 +0100
> > From: Martin Pieuchot
> >
> > On 05/03/13(Tue) 21:57, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 12:03:49PM +0100, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> > > > On 5 March 2013 11:55, Mark Kettenis
On 2013/03/06 15:24, Silamael wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In if_trunk.c there's an explicit if_down() for trunk ports being
> removed from the trunk. This seems unnecessary to me and is there since
> the trunk feature has initially added to OpenBSD.
I looked at this some time ago (because it's super annoyin
On 2013/03/06 13:05, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> It's not entirely obvious that "-x509" actually means "produce a
> csr, self-sign it (defaulting to SHA1), throw away the csr and write
> the cert" and this had me stuck for a long time when I wanted to
> play with DSA server certs.
>
> So here's a di
> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 15:25:34 +0100
> From: Martin Pieuchot
>
> On 05/03/13(Tue) 21:57, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 12:03:49PM +0100, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> > > On 5 March 2013 11:55, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > >> Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:36:36 +0100
> > > >> From: Marti
On 05/03/13(Tue) 21:57, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 12:03:49PM +0100, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> > On 5 March 2013 11:55, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > >> Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:36:36 +0100
> > >> From: Martin Pieuchot
> > >>
> > >> The ifaddr structure contains a reference counter a
Hi,
In if_trunk.c there's an explicit if_down() for trunk ports being
removed from the trunk. This seems unnecessary to me and is there since
the trunk feature has initially added to OpenBSD.
Greetings,
Matthias
===
diff --git a/sy
When ls -l is run on a directory without execute permission, fail with a
error value of 1
Ok?
Index: ls.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ls/ls.c,v
retrieving revision 1.37
diff -u -p -r1.37 ls.c
--- ls.c4 Mar 2011 21:03:19 -
Hi,
When ls -l is run on a directory which has no execute permissions, ls
fails but the return value is 0.
bash-4.2$ ls -ld /tmp/foo/
drw-r-xr-x 3 sac wheel 512 Mar 6 18:11 /tmp/foo/
bash-4.2$ ls -l /tmp/foo/
bash-4.2$ echo $?
0
bash-4.2$
I see in the traverse function:
It's not entirely obvious that "-x509" actually means "produce a
csr, self-sign it (defaulting to SHA1), throw away the csr and write
the cert" and this had me stuck for a long time when I wanted to
play with DSA server certs.
So here's a diff which moves DSA cert generation instructions
to the sa
2013/3/6 Mark Kettenis
> > My amd64 testbox running this has only 6G, so we can cry over red wine
> > together.. 8-(
> > the 1TB boxes at work have too many cores for obsd to run on them so I
> > can't really make dmesg pr0n on them.
>
> Even when you disable HyperThreading?
>
No, but when booti
> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 09:25:51 +0100
> From: Janne Johansson
>
> 2013/3/5 Bob Beck :
> > On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Bob Beck wrote:
> >> You too can have a GIANT buffer cache etc. etc...
> >
> > Great.. and now I have people mailing me dmesg's from machines with 16
> > and 32 Gigs of
2013/3/5 Bob Beck :
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Bob Beck wrote:
>> You too can have a GIANT buffer cache etc. etc...
>
> Great.. and now I have people mailing me dmesg's from machines with 16
> and 32 Gigs of ram. I only have 8 I feel so. small...
My amd64 testbox running this h
22 matches
Mail list logo
