profile
viewpoint

aalmenar/fetchmailgen 1

.fetchmailrc generator from database

aalmenar/acme.sh 0

A pure Unix shell script implementing ACME client protocol

aalmenar/actix 0

Actor framework for Rust

aalmenar/actix-net 0

framework for composable networking services

aalmenar/actix-web 0

Actix web is a small, pragmatic, and extremely fast rust web framework.

aalmenar/apple_bleee 0

Apple BLE research

aalmenar/apt-mirror 0

Official apt-mirror source.

aalmenar/chef-monit 0

Chef cookbook for monit package

issue commentFRRouting/frr

Debian Bullseye FRR repository issues

Version 8.1.0 is not available in the repository. Getting the source with "apt-get source frr" for any version newer than 7.5.1 its not possible.

aalmenar

comment created time in 13 days

issue openedFRRouting/frr

Debian Bullseye FRR repository issues

[X] Did you check if this is a duplicate issue? [X] Did you test it on the latest FRRouting/frr master branch?

cat /etc/apt/sources.list.d/frr.list deb https://deb.frrouting.org/frr bullseye frr-8

dpkg -l | grep frr ii frr 8.0.1-0~deb11u1 amd64 FRRouting suite of internet protocols (BGP, OSPF, IS-IS, ...)

The repository keep installing version 8.0.1. Doing apt-get source frr downloads version 7.5.1.

created time in 14 days

issue commentFRRouting/frr

Debian FRR repository with version issues.

Now that 8.1 is release it has been partially uploaded to the repository. Triying to download the source says the .dsc file that size doesnt match the orig.gz file source.

tuxfrw

comment created time in 14 days

startedxenetis/letsencrypt-expiration

started time in 15 days

issue openedFRRouting/frr

When using FRR as Route Server ipv6 next-hop link-local get overwritten with route server link-local address.

  • FRR VERSION (From Frrouting Debian Repositories) 8.0.0, 8.0.1, 8.1.0

  • OPERATING SYSTEM VERSION Debian 10 and Debian 11

  • KERNEL VERSION

  • 4.19 and 5.10

Describe the bug When using FRR as a Route Server, with IPv4 everyhing goes smoothly all peers receive as next-hop the one where they should direct their traffic. When using IPv6 the issue arises:

Route Server:

  • Link-local: fe80::dc2d:63ff:fe0b:d5eb/64
  • Global: 2001:xxx:xxx::f3a8:0:1/48

Peer 1:

  • Link-local: fe80::901f:9bff:fe2d:adba/64
  • Global: 2001:xxx:xxx::f20a:0:1/48
  • Announces: 2axx:3xxx::/32

Peer 2:

  • Receives on BGP Update packet 2 addresses: Prefix: 2axx:3xxx::/32 Next-Hop: fe80::dc2d:63ff:fe0b:d5eb (This is the Route Server link local) Next-Hop: 2001:xxx:xxx::f20a:0:1 (This is the global from peer 1)

Peer 2 is receiving the wrong link-local next-hop and theres currently no way of overriding this behaviour.

Can be solved partially if peer 2 is a FRRouting and you set a route-map with "set ipv6 next-hop prefer-global", but there are some other equipments that can't make this in their incoming filters.

[x] Did you check if this is a duplicate issue? [ ] Did you test it on the latest FRRouting/frr master branch?

To Reproduce Setup a simple route-server and connect two peers.

Expected behavior To receive the link-local of the real next-hop, not being overwritten by the route server one.

created time in 15 days

starteddmachard/go-dnscollector

started time in a month

startedLMBertholdo/verfploeter

started time in a month

startedtoreanderson/clatd

started time in a month

startedjulienschmidt/httprouter

started time in a month

starteddmachard/dnstap-receiver

started time in a month

startedirrtoolset/irrtoolset

started time in a month

startedamarcu5/EdgeOS-Blacklist

started time in 2 months

startedWaterByWind/edgeos-bl-mgmt

started time in 2 months

issue openedhashicorp/vagrant_cloud

Using sample code does not upload the box

When testing the api i followed the sample code:

# Upload box asset
uri = URI.parse(upload_url[:upload_path])
request = Net::HTTP::Post.new(uri)
box = File.open(BOX_PATH, "rb")
request.set_form([["file", box]], "multipart/form-data")
response = Net::HTTP.start(uri.hostname, uri.port, use_ssl: uri.scheme.eql?("https")) do |http|
  http.request(request)
end

On the response i always get Http Service unavailable.

i'm i missing something ?

created time in 2 months

starteddeic-dk/DDPS

started time in 2 months

startedbergmann-it/edgeos-scripts

started time in 2 months

startedbgp/bgpq4

started time in 3 months

issue closedrspamd/rspamd

[BUG] dmarc reports sent in version 3.0 doesn't include dkim on auth results

After upgrading from rspam 2.7 to 3.0, updating dmarc configuration according to upgrade notes in 3.0 now the dmarc reports doesn't include in the reports between <auth_results> the dkim status:

Email sent had this after being received:

Authentication-Results: mx1.domainrcpt.com; dkim=pass header.d=domainsender.com header.s=20210616143714114 header.b=MwL64kqo; spf=pass (mx1.domainrcpt.com: domain of user@domainsender.com designates x.x.x.x as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=user@domainsender.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=domainsender.com

But in the XML generated for reports, you can see a gap in auth_results node:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<feedback>
  <report_metadata>
    <org_name>DMARC Report</org_name>
    <email>dmarc@reports.domainrcpt.com</email>
    <report_id>domainsender.com.1630524024.1630524215</report_id>
    <date_range>
      <begin>1630524024</begin>
      <end>1630524215</end>
    </date_range>
  </report_metadata>
  <policy_published>
    <domain>domainsender.com</domain>
    <adkim>r</adkim>
    <aspf>r</aspf>
    <p>reject</p>
    <sp>none</sp>
    <pct>100</pct>
  </policy_published>
<record>
  <row>
    <source_ip>x.x.x.x</source_ip>
    <count>1</count>
    <policy_evaluated>
      <disposition>none</disposition>
      <dkim>pass</dkim>
      <spf>pass</spf>
      
    </policy_evaluated>
  </row>
  <identifiers>
    <header_from>domainsender.com</header_from>
  </identifiers>
  <auth_results>
    
    
    
    <spf>
      <domain>domainsender.com</domain>
      <result>pass</result>
    </spf>
  </auth_results>
</record>
</feedback>

So probably a bug, but i could not find where the issue is.

my dmarc.conf looks like this:

servers = "x.x.x.x";

  reporting {
    # Required attributes
    enabled = true; # Enable reports in general
    email = 'dmarc@reports.domainrcpt.com'; # Source of DMARC reports
    domain = 'domainrcpt.com'; # Domain to serve
    org_name = 'DMARC Report'; # Organisation
    # Optional parameters
    report_local_controller = false; # Store reports for local/controller scans (for testing only)
    helo = 'reports.domainrcpt.com'; # Helo used in SMTP dialog
    smtp = '127.0.0.1'; # SMTP server IP
    smtp_port = 25; # SMTP server port
    from_name = 'dmarc@reports.domainrcpt.com'; # SMTP FROM
    msgid_from = 'dmarc'; # Msgid format
    max_entries = 1k; # Maxiumum amount of entries per domain
    keys_expire = 2d; # Expire date for Redis keys
    #only_domains = '/path/to/map'; # Store reports merely from those domains
  }

closed time in 3 months

aalmenar

issue commentrspamd/rspamd

[BUG] dmarc reports sent in version 3.0 doesn't include dkim on auth results

Nevermind. Restarted the services in the cluster, now its ok.

Sorry for the confusion.

aalmenar

comment created time in 3 months

issue commentrspamd/rspamd

[BUG] dmarc reports sent in version 3.0 doesn't include dkim on auth results

You might probably have not installed the fix...

yes, this change...

https://github.com/rspamd/rspamd/commit/78a44caf619fd293fcc097e77641b98e76c655fe

Verified again, its there

but running rspamadm dmarc_report -n -v

non of the reports include it

aalmenar

comment created time in 3 months

issue commentrspamd/rspamd

[BUG] dmarc reports sent in version 3.0 doesn't include dkim on auth results

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<feedback>
  <report_metadata>
    <org_name>DMARC Report</org_name>
    <email>dmarc@reports.rcptdomain.com</email>
    <report_id>senderdomain.com.1630568989.1630682508</report_id>
    <date_range>
      <begin>1630568989</begin>
      <end>1630682508</end>
    </date_range>
  </report_metadata>
  <policy_published>
    <domain>senderdomain.com</domain>
    <adkim>r</adkim>
    <aspf>r</aspf>
    <p>reject</p>
    <sp>none</sp>
    <pct>100</pct>
  </policy_published>
<record>
  <row>
    <source_ip>x.x.x.x</source_ip>
    <count>1</count>
    <policy_evaluated>
      <disposition>none</disposition>
      <dkim>pass</dkim>
      <spf>pass</spf>
    </policy_evaluated>
  </row>
  <identifiers>
    <header_from>senderdomain.com</header_from>
  </identifiers>
  <auth_results>
    
    <spf>
      <domain>senderdomain.com</domain>
      <result>pass</result>
    </spf>
  </auth_results>
</record>
</feedback>

this is the one i received, maybe somthing wron in the dmarc config ?

aalmenar

comment created time in 3 months

issue commentrspamd/rspamd

[BUG] dmarc reports sent in version 3.0 doesn't include dkim on auth results

@vstakhov tried your changes but the xml is still missing the auth_data on dkim even though that dkim has passed, so the reports still are innacurate or incomplete.

aalmenar

comment created time in 3 months

issue openedrspamd/rspamd

[BUG] dmarc reports sent in version 3.0 doesn't include dkim on auth results

After upgrading from rspam 2.7 to 3.0, updating dmarc configuration according to upgrade notes in 3.0 now the dmarc reports doesn't include in the reports between <auth_results> the dkim status:

Email sent had this after being received:

Authentication-Results: mx1.domainrcpt.com; dkim=pass header.d=domainsender.com header.s=20210616143714114 header.b=MwL64kqo; spf=pass (mx1.domainrcpt.com: domain of user@domainsender.com designates x.x.x.x as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=user@domainsender.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=domainsender.com

But in the XML generated for reports, you can see a gap in auth_results node:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<feedback>
  <report_metadata>
    <org_name>DMARC Report</org_name>
    <email>dmarc@reports.domainrcpt.com</email>
    <report_id>domainsender.com.1630524024.1630524215</report_id>
    <date_range>
      <begin>1630524024</begin>
      <end>1630524215</end>
    </date_range>
  </report_metadata>
  <policy_published>
    <domain>domainsender.com</domain>
    <adkim>r</adkim>
    <aspf>r</aspf>
    <p>reject</p>
    <sp>none</sp>
    <pct>100</pct>
  </policy_published>
<record>
  <row>
    <source_ip>x.x.x.x</source_ip>
    <count>1</count>
    <policy_evaluated>
      <disposition>none</disposition>
      <dkim>pass</dkim>
      <spf>pass</spf>
      
    </policy_evaluated>
  </row>
  <identifiers>
    <header_from>domainsender.com</header_from>
  </identifiers>
  <auth_results>
    
    
    
    <spf>
      <domain>domainsender.com</domain>
      <result>pass</result>
    </spf>
  </auth_results>
</record>
</feedback>

So probably a bug, but i could not find where the issue is.

created time in 3 months

startedbenjojo/sping

started time in 3 months

more