X-Junk-Score: 0 [] X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 [] Return-Path: Received: from mx.niversoft.com ([83.137.200.194] verified) by mail.stalker.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.2) with ESMTP id 58657712 for CGatePro@mail.stalker.com; Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:29:48 -0800 Received-SPF: pass receiver=mail.stalker.com; client-ip=83.137.200.194; envelope-from=nicolas.hatier@niversoft.com Received: from [66.110.158.160] (account postmaster HELO niversoft.com) by mx.niversoft.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.1 _community_) with ESMTPSA id 231972 for CGatePro@mail.stalker.com; Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:26:27 +0100 X-CGP-ClamAV-Result: CLEAN X-VirusScanner: Niversoft's CGPClamav Helper v1.9.7a (ClamAV engine v0.95.3) X-ExtFilter: Niversoft's DomainKeys Helper DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; d=niversoft.com; s=default; h=Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Z217MRYI8kW9BeX9LUbwabcy9MxHNaesXiWS0lfX5IiMnlhT8BPMOIRRh4Xw3PKAnf LvECdIXwdbaqZrI0YdoJzFf1m2T2wr3W28fSGv7rVpkxml215utgirCtFOmPZgLBXgbu KZgiyFXqjFIyNXdX7z8llNW2Qp5wMFFIjYD5E= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=niversoft.com; s=default; l=4775; t=1265300965; x=1265905765; q=dns/txt; h=Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To: Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type; bh=hTk8DiYxlFaqK5Bx P7ulvV2d4Q691y4nUrfvS06r2TM=; b=lkLfXDnaCqkbQ1BwlBi+Ozqg4ry/mvy4 +bXYuB95OuiMOJjww5q7Xagx5minB6RsrnjkTH5jAtNcPHrQ8HxWUue8UwKe4n0q 5eA90gXn+3v809NNz5OhYlRCn3BXConMRje3TR5GHoZoJtETshUztLRyaEbiGA+k dvDUy52MyfQ= Received: from dummy.name; Thu, 04 Feb 2010 11:29:25 -0500 Message-ID: <4B6AF5E5.50907@niversoft.com> Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 11:29:25 -0500 From: Nicolas Hatier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: CommuniGate Pro Discussions Subject: Re: Failed to receive message body References: <,> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080105060703040304070808" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080105060703040304070808 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2010-02-04 11:06, Paul Galati wrote: > "CommuniGate Pro Discussions" on February 3= , > 2010 at 8:44 AM -0500 wrote: > =20 >> Note that in both cases the reported errors are related to connection >> problems (the connection was explicitly reset by the remote peer, or i= t >> was dead for 5 minutes). This may indicate a problem with the network = or >> an activity of some anti-virus or a like working on the SMTP level. >> =20 > > The problem was stemming from our Cisco ASA 5505 ESMTP inspection filte= r. > Evidently there is a known 998 byte default that has been causing > problems. Once I turned that inspection off, mail flowed like brand ne= w > pipe, except for Yahoo which is not our fault. > =20 In my opinion, those filters are in place to "protect" bad or badly=20 configured mail servers. CGP is usually neither of those, and the=20 firewall SMTP filters hurts CGP efficiency and proper function. > I have been informed that because I disabled the ESMTP inspection, outs= ide > people, if they knew how, could access the server via telnet on port 25= > and possibly send mail through that. Is this true and if so, what migh= t I > do to prevent or decrease the chances of an uninvited guest relaying > through my server. > =20 Opening a TCP connection on port 25 is THE method to send messages. Of=20 course you want that. Relaying through your server will not be possible=20 if your CGP is configured not to allow relaying of outside addresses=20 (default configuration). NH > Thanks for your time. > > Paul > =20 --=20 *Nicolas Hatier, ing.* > Niversoft id=E9es logicielles - http://www.niversoft.com --------------080105060703040304070808 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2010-02-04 11:06, Paul Galati wrote: 
"CommuniGate Pro Discussions" <CGatePro@mail.stalker.com> on February 3,
2010 at 8:44 AM -0500 wrote:
  
Note that in both cases the reported errors are related to connection 
problems (the connection was explicitly reset by the remote peer, or it 
was dead for 5 minutes). This may indicate a problem with the network or 
an activity of some anti-virus or a like working on the SMTP level.
    

The problem was stemming from our Cisco ASA 5505 ESMTP inspection filter. 
Evidently there is a known 998 byte default that has been causing
problems.  Once I turned that inspection off, mail flowed like brand new
pipe, except for Yahoo which is not our fault.
In my opinion, those filters are in place to "protect" bad or badly configured mail servers. CGP is usually neither of those, and the firewall SMTP filters hurts CGP efficiency and proper function.
I have been informed that because I disabled the ESMTP inspection, outside
people, if they knew how, could access the server via telnet on port 25
and possibly send mail through that.  Is this true and if so, what might I
do to prevent or decrease the chances of an uninvited guest relaying
through my server.
Opening a TCP connection on port 25 is THE method to send messages. Of course you want that. Relaying through your server will not be possible if your CGP is configured not to allow relaying of outside addresses (default configuration).

NH
Thanks for your time.

Paul

--

Nicolas Hatier, ing. <nicolas.hatier@niversoft.com>
Niversoft idées logicielles - http://www.niversoft.com

--------------080105060703040304070808--