Outlook rules don't work

ozy · 2026-06-30T06:25:07+00:00

Running gromox 3.7.345.xd02abaf, I noticed that Outlook rules don't work anymore. Created a simple rule "from user X move to folder Y and stop evaluating oth...

ozy

@mwilliams I was using non-twostep rule processor earlier, but switched to two step rule processor as described in the 3rd post. Two step rule processor also doesn't work for me, intra-domain mail move rules not being executed.

Current system config:

mail:~ # grep lda /etc/gromox/exmdb_local.cfg
lda_twostep_ruleproc=1
lda_mrautoproc=yes
mail:~ # rpm -qa | grep gromox
system-user-gromox-9-lp160.6.1.noarch
gromox-3.8.137.m650fd5b-lp160.58.1.x86_64
gromox-debugsource-3.8.137.m650fd5b-lp160.58.1.x86_64
gromox-debuginfo-3.8.137.m650fd5b-lp160.58.1.x86_64

ozy

For the sake of testing, I've updated to gromox-3.8.150.m2329331 that came out this morning.

Test setup:
Created a rule in outlook for user A@mydomain.tld that moves mail from B@mydomain.tld to draft folder.
Created a rule in grommunio-web for user B@mydomain.tld that moves mail from A@mydomain.tld to draft folder.
Both rules don't work.
Creating a rule for user A@mydomain.tld tyhat moves mail from C@otherdomain.tld to draft works though.

Am I the only one experiencing this ?
I mean I just outruled outlook since the same problem happens when using Grommunio-Web. Any chance there's some mixup in addressing between EX and STMP prefixes ? That would explain why only internal mails aren't moved around.

ozy

In order to try to debug, I set the following:

In /etc/gromox/exmdb_local.cfg:

lda_twostep_ruleproc=1
lda_mrautoproc=yes
ruleproc_debug=1

In /etc/gromox/delivery.cfg:

lda_log_level=6

In /etc/gromox/http.cfg:

http_log_level=6
http_debug=1

After restarting all services, I tried to check logs, ie journalctl -S "2026-07-28 19:15:00" | grep -i rule but only got one line which doesn't really look like it has anything to do with the two step rule processor:

juil. 28 19:23:43 mail.netperfect.fr gromox-http[1895]: mod_rewrite: defaulting to built-in rule list

Can anyone point me to the right log settings and path to diag the two step ruleprocessor ?

Thanks.

WalterH

Update to gromox-3.9.17 and test again. Second test: create the rule with g-Web and test?

ozy

@WalterH both done without success.

Do you know by any chance where I am supposed to find the ruleproc debug logs ?

ozy

Okay, so I finally got the ruleproc debug logs.
My bad, I enabled ruleproc_debug=1 in /etc/gromox/exmdb_local.cfg instead of /etc/gromox/gromox.cfg.
Really a keyboard-chair interface problem ^^

I created a fresh "TEST-RULE" in grommunio-web, which moves messages from surname.familyname@mydomain.tld to folder "TEST" in account othersurname.otherfamilyname@mydomain.tld

Now when sending a message from surname.familyname@mydomain.tld to othersurname.otherfamilyname@mydomain.tld , the rule doesn't get executed and I get the following log (username and domain properly redacted to reflect the above rule while keeping case and exact syntax):

juil. 30 09:51:34 mail.mydomain.tld gromox-delivery[1355]: Rule_Condition RES_COMMENT{props[4]={PT_LONG{1/0x1},PT_BINARY{[116]="EX:/O=I6509FB5C/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=0100000001000000-SURNAME.FAMILYNAME^@"},PT_UNICODE{[46]="Surname Familyname <surname.familyname@mydomain.tld>"},PT_LONG{0/0x0},},res={RES_PROP{val(c1d0102h) == PT_BINARY{[116]="EX:/O=I6509FB5C/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=0100000001000000-SURNAME.FAMILYNAME^@"}}}}

Perhaps I will post this on github, I have no clue what to do with that debug log, except noticing that the comparaison lacks PT_UNICODE property on one side ^^

WalterH

Today grommunio released a huge update. Try the update first.

ozy

Unfortunately I am already running gromox-3.9.17 and still got this issue.
I think I cannot get more debug info than that.

WalterH

For Outlook there is a startup switch /cleanrules, try to remove all rules and recreate a simple test rule, to move a mail into a folder and test again.
outlook.exe /cleanrules

ozy

Nice, didn't know that command.
I've created a fresh rule with gromox-3.9.17.ma5462c9-lp160.5.1.x86_64, but it doesn't work any better.
Here's the log

juil. 31 10:57:13 mail.mydomain.tld gromox-delivery[1337]: Rule_Condition RES_COMMENT{props[4]={PT_LONG{1/0x1},PT_BINARY{[134]="^@^@^@^@^dc^a7@^c8^c0B^P^Z^b4^b9^H^@+/^e1^82^A^@^@^@^@^@^@^@/o=i6509fb5c/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=0100000008000000-o.otherfamilyname^@"},PT_UNICODE{[8]="O. Otherfamilyname"},PT_LONG{0/0x0},},res={RES_PROP{val(c1d0102h) == PT_BINARY{[109]="EX:/O=I6509FB5C/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=0100000008000000-O.OTHERFAMILYNAME^@"}}}}

ozy

Currenty running gromox-3.9.147.m8733a2c

Can confirm that https://github.com/grommunio/gromox/commit/e9a2178830de17385459cb974e5e27aa487a98dd and https://github.com/grommunio/gromox/commit/bc6ab2dbdb92b58ad912d91fa7165dfcfc746ed1 resolved the issue.

Thanks to all.

ozy

Was too fast.
On one of my servers (updated to gromox-3.9.147.m8733a2c-lp160.19.1.x86_64) there's still the same error.

Corresponding logs:

août 04 15:21:12 email.somedomain.tld gromox-delivery[1518]: Rule_Condition RES_COMMENT{props[4]={60000003h=PT_LONG{1/0x1},10102h=PT_BINARY{[135]="^@^@^@^@^dc^a7@^c8^c0B^P^Z^b4^b9^H^@+/^e1^82^A^@^@^@^@^@^@^@/o=i6892210b/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=0100000003000000-s.familyname^@"},1001fh=PT_UNICODE{[15]="Surname FamilyName"},39000003h=PT_LONG{0/0x0},},res={RES_PROP{val(c1d0102h) == PT_BINARY{[110]="EX:/O=I6892210B/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=0100000003000000-S.FAMILYNAME^@"}}}}

Of course server has been properly rebooted after upgrade. Are there perhaps different EX/SMTP forms depending on the "server install age"?

ozy

I've decided to dig the issue a bit deeper.
Installed a fresh Grommunio server, and updated mine.
Both servers run gromox-3.9.195.m185aab5-lp160.34.1.x86_64

I've made sure to have identical conf files in /etc/gromox (apart from org name, server name and sql settings of course).
I've created rules on both servers via Grommunio-web UI so I can outrule Outlook.

The new test server is vanilla, 3 standard users configured for testing, with various naming schemas to see whether there could be a problem with different names/cases/special characters.

My own private server (which I use since July 2023) properly processes my rules.

août 07 14:59:15 mail.mydomain.tld gromox-delivery[1337]: SMTP message queue-ID: 1, FROM: v.julia@mydomain.tld, TO: orsiris.dejong@mydomain.tld  message R-d1/9e4b052e71024bb28e3b1a3342a2d1d1 was delivered OK
août 07 14:59:15 mail.mydomain.tld gromox-delivery[1337]: Rule_Condition RES_COMMENT{props[4]={60000003h=PT_LONG{1/0x1},10102h=PT_BINARY{[134]="^@^@^@^@^dc^a7@^c8^c0B^P^Z^b4^b9^H^@+/^e1^82^A^@^@^@^@^@^@^@/o=i6509fb5c/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=0100000008000000-v.julia^@"},1001fh=PT_UNICODE{[8]="V. Julia"},39000003h=PT_LONG{0/0x0},},res={RES_PROP{val(c1d0102h) == PT_BINARY{[109]="EX:/O=I6509FB5C/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=0100000008000000-V.JULIA^@"}}}}
août 07 14:59:15 mail.mydomain.tld gromox-delivery[1337]: Rule_Action ACTION_BLOCK{MOVE{same?=1,folder={fid=0x1d0001,mid=0x0,inst=0}}}

My new test server doesn't want to execute the rule:

Aug 07 05:56:36 email.hd1py.com gromox-delivery[1069]: SMTP message queue-ID: 1, FROM: o.yo@otherdomain.tld, TO: jul@otherdomain.tld  message R-7d/30c50d0acf8f468d83051a319a907b7d was delivered OK
Aug 07 05:56:36 email.hd1py.com gromox-delivery[1069]: Rule_Condition RES_COMMENT{props[4]={60000003h=PT_LONG{1/0x1},10102h=PT_BINARY{[106]="EX:/O=I6A5F85E7/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=0100000003000000-O.YO^@"},1001fh=PT_UNICODE{[31]="Onan Lebarbare <o.yo@otherdomain.tld>"},39000003h=PT_LONG{0/0x0},},res={RES_PROP{val(c1d0102h) == PT_BINARY{[106]="EX:/O=I6A5F85E7/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=0100000003000000-O.YO^@"}}}}
<no other rule log>

Of course both servers have lda_twostep_ruleproc=1.

I've even begun digging into the rule properties via MFCMAPI using outlook profiles just to check that there isn't a SMTP/EX mix somewhere, are a lowercase/uppercase compare. All the addresses I use don't have any special characters in them, neither in their displayname. Hell I even compared the mysql databases to see whether I could find anything interesting that could explain why those rules don't work.

I am really puzzled. A freshly installed server (from the Grommunio appliance ISO grommunio 2026.06.1), with sole modification being enabling the two step rule processor does not work for rule processing based on internal email senders. I can't be the sole and only guy facing this issue.

Whatever the dev team might ask (MFCMAPI extracts of the rule table, the msg format of the mails sent)... I'll happily provide.

wim-bart

Yesterday I recreated a rule, but did not use an address out of the address book. The rule was simple, if send from “fail2ban@mydomain.nl” move it to Fail2Ban. The address fail2ban does not exist on my host.
And this morning, I was surprised to see messages where moved to the fail2Ban folder.

ozy

wim-bart As I suggested above, the problem only appears for rules that reference internal users. So far, using your non existing address as "if sender contains" should work as expected, as long as your antispam doesn't block your non existent sender.

« Previous Page