OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
anti-UCE efficacy of smtpd_helo_required

From: /dev/rob0 (rob0gmx.co.uk)
Date: Fri Oct 01 2004 - 19:29:21 CDT


This may be borderline in topicality, but I just got handed (by
surprise) a rather busy domain to host, and I would like to know from
those who use it, how effective have you found "smtpd_helo_required" in
curtailing spam? Are there known brain-dead SMTP MUA's which don't say
HELO? I just don't want to risk losing real mail.

I tried to test this myself using
[main.cf]
    smtpd_helo_restrictions =
        warn_if_reject check_helo_access regexp:/etc/postfix/helo
[/etc/postfix/helo]
    !/./ 452 A proper HELO/EHLO, please
but that seems to match everything, HELO or no HELO. I'm telnet'ing to
the smtpd, not saying HELO, and sending mail with no reject_warning.

I thought about it a bit and figured that smtpd_helo_restrictions might
not be applied to a null HELO. So I took that out and added it here:
[main.cf]
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
     warn_if_reject check_helo_access regexp:/etc/postfix/helo,
     permit_mynetworks, reject_unauth_destination
I telnet'ed in from outside $mynetworks, no HELO, still no warning.

How do I match a null HELO/EHLO other than with smtpd_helo_required? Or
should I stop worrying and learn to love the smtpd_helo_required?
--
    mail to this address is discarded unless "/dev/rob0"
    or "not-spam" is in Subject: header