From a0d439f832721ab1b4bdcf9ab844ee20d4dc1682 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guilhem Moulin Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 21:13:19 +0100 Subject: submission: Prospective SPF checking. Cf. http://www.openspf.org/Best_Practices/Outbound . --- .../etc/postfix-policyd-spf-python/policyd-spf.conf.j2 | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) create mode 100644 roles/MSA/templates/etc/postfix-policyd-spf-python/policyd-spf.conf.j2 (limited to 'roles/MSA/templates/etc/postfix-policyd-spf-python') diff --git a/roles/MSA/templates/etc/postfix-policyd-spf-python/policyd-spf.conf.j2 b/roles/MSA/templates/etc/postfix-policyd-spf-python/policyd-spf.conf.j2 new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2cc1074 --- /dev/null +++ b/roles/MSA/templates/etc/postfix-policyd-spf-python/policyd-spf.conf.j2 @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +# {{ ansible_managed }} +# Do NOT edit this file directly! + +debugLevel = 1 +TestOnly = 1 + +HELO_reject = Softfail +Mail_From_reject = Softfail + +PermError_reject = False +TempError_Defer = False + +# We're just trying to keep our outgoing IPs clean of SPF violations, +# not seeking 100% accurate reports. While it's possible that the +# message is routed through a different IP (eg, IPv4 vs v6), giving a +# potentially inaccurate prospective report, it's quite unlikely in +# practice. +Prospective = {{ lookup('pipe', 'dig outgoing.fripost.org A +short | sort | head -n1') }} -- cgit v1.2.3