Difference between revisions of "Spamdyke"
From Atomicorp Wiki
(New page: == Overview == www.spamdyke.org == Known Issues == Spamdyke under el4 (CentOS4 and RHEL4) does not create dynamic executables, and is therefore in conflict with the stack protection ...) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
== Overview == | == Overview == | ||
| Line 7: | Line 6: | ||
== Known Issues == | == Known Issues == | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''RHEL4/CentOS4''' | ||
Spamdyke under el4 (CentOS4 and RHEL4) does not create dynamic executables, and is therefore in conflict with the stack protection in the ASL kernel. As such spamdyke is not supported under ASL in *ANY WAY*. | Spamdyke under el4 (CentOS4 and RHEL4) does not create dynamic executables, and is therefore in conflict with the stack protection in the ASL kernel. As such spamdyke is not supported under ASL in *ANY WAY*. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | '''Plesk''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | As a general recommendation, all RBL's should be implemented in spamdyke, and not through the plesk interface. This allows blacklisted hosts to still send mail using authentication | ||
Latest revision as of 12:17, 11 February 2009
[edit] Overview
www.spamdyke.org
[edit] Known Issues
RHEL4/CentOS4
Spamdyke under el4 (CentOS4 and RHEL4) does not create dynamic executables, and is therefore in conflict with the stack protection in the ASL kernel. As such spamdyke is not supported under ASL in *ANY WAY*.
Plesk
As a general recommendation, all RBL's should be implemented in spamdyke, and not through the plesk interface. This allows blacklisted hosts to still send mail using authentication
