From nobody Fri Mar 31 18:58:42 2023 X-Original-To: questions@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Pp8hW4Qymz437Lf for ; Fri, 31 Mar 2023 18:58:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trashcan@ellael.org) Received: from mx1.enfer-du-nord.net (mx1.enfer-du-nord.net [91.121.41.56]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Pp8hV5Qxnz3Fx5 for ; Fri, 31 Mar 2023 18:58:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trashcan@ellael.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=ellael.org header.s=dkim header.b=YM7VWyj4; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of trashcan@ellael.org designates 91.121.41.56 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=trashcan@ellael.org; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=ellael.org Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [176.95.28.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.enfer-du-nord.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Pp8hL60BmzQYc for ; Fri, 31 Mar 2023 20:58:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ellael.org; s=dkim; t=1680289122; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PPbHDpKeuZi6DUg0bC8Qw2GXU/CyeJ4C02ICtZHXfxo=; b=YM7VWyj4gHOw1eQrca1t6d8t0bfrVThdPWVICsLAm7rdagbW2ldpTYPN2ivPTOWApSIRBo FRwO+pzWn9JIgceCWdsPUNfftG+18RtFyaZXJuqk3Lys3g0osuA0r2a0XZdJ9CP1xqov2L ndA67Ii9iRIeg6q0QxfkZlVAcGCV/UlTid+hppIk84hp10sxXIlegyzN9/N09eCvqA7HPV EYHOBwkJAxPP+2jLx+egxR25NhGVr4I0Qtop9HKaQJAjc+8nNhq8GXoJL1T6E4IwmcWxzo EFCMvpr8bMDp5fETtFtIXovHvd5jQC9AnUr4sDlZ7cS8ZnN3SkCzAk8Xm/yVdg== From: Michael Grimm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: User questions List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-questions List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.3\)) Subject: Re: Understanding blacklistd blocklists -- 'bad user' doesn't get blocked Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 20:58:42 +0200 References: <91FB3707-BE92-4B35-ACD6-08AB6E8735B5@nxg.name> To: questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <91FB3707-BE92-4B35-ACD6-08AB6E8735B5@nxg.name> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.3) X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.50 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.997]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[ellael.org,quarantine]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:91.121.41.56]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[ellael.org:s=dkim]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[ellael.org:+]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[questions@freebsd.org]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16276, ipnet:91.121.0.0/16, country:FR]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[questions@freebsd.org]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Pp8hV5Qxnz3Fx5 X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N Norman Gray wrote: > I see that in January last year, 'tanis' noted the same thing in the = forum [4], and remarked that a patched version of blacklistd.c, which = incremented the wickedness count for such users, didn't cause any = surprising problems. Is there a case for having BL_BADUSER = optionally/configurably increment the wickedness counter? Yeah, that's something bothering me for a while now, and, raising hand, = I wouldn't make it "optionally/configurably", I do opt for treating = those break-in attempts to user accounts as blacklisting worth as those = for administrator accounts! Regards, Michael=