Re: Banning a user from posting to Debian lists

[Charles Kroeger]

just checking

-- 
CK

Banning a user from posting to Debian lists

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

[Also posted to commun...@debian.org / listmas...@lists.debian.org]

Subject: Banning of a user from posting to Debian lists
===

As noted in the monthly FAQ, among the events that can take place on Debian
lists as a result of breach of the Debian Code of Conduct is a temporary or
permanent ban from the mailing lists (and other official Debian resources).

Following  a last attempt to reach out and further consideration, it has been
requested to ban Sophie / Michael from the Debian-user mailing lists and other
resoures.

The mailing list threads have gone on for some years with no resolution and no
improvement in engagement with others: taken as a whole, this amounts to
misusing the goodwill of those on the list and, potentially, a misuse of
Debian resources overall.

Such decisions are taken rarely: this is an unusual event. As ever, it is
requested that people continue to behave according to the standards expressed
in the Debian Code of Conduct - being considerate and constructive and helpful
to others.

You should appreciate that this decision as final: as ever, the 
Community Team is there to discuss conduct in Debian channels.

With every good wish, as ever,

Andrew Cater
(amaca...@debian.org)

For the Community Team

debian-lists-test for your test posts, was Re: Which MTA for from-based smarthost selection, local delivery and queuing?

[David Wright]

On Thu 08 Sep 2022 at 10:54:20 (-0400), rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> Sorry, this is a test email.  Not sure how to do it "off list" (more 
> explanation later, maybe)

There's a very underpublicised list called

  debian-lists-test

specially designed for such tests.

Cheers,
David.

Re: introducing myself, I am new to the Debian lists

[l0f4r0]

Hi,

Such an email is pretty rare so thanks for taking the time to write it and 
share your experience :)
I hope you'll enjoy the discussions here.

Cheers Marco!
l0f4r0

introducing myself, I am new to the Debian lists

[Marco Möller]

Hello!
I am Marco, new to the Debian lists, and thought to quickly introduce 
myself before joining conversations or asking questions.
I have several years of experience as a desktop user, always using 
Debian or once for some year a very close derivative of it called Sparky 
Linux. After having used the Debian stable branch for years and 
meanwhile feel well prepared to twiddle with the interference which 
might come up, I recently switched to the testing branch. My current 
desktop environment grew from a minimal KDE Plasma install to a typical 
workstation as used in a life and materials science context for image 
analysis and light programming tasks. My desktop also includes some 
typical internet search and browsing, communication and backup tools. 
Concerning my Linux experience, it's all about being a user who needs 
its work done off the IT business where most of you seem to be involved 
in. However, eventually I am ready to also advance my knowledge about 
the more profound Linux system administration.
I was lurking the lists for some time now and suppose to not only find 
answers to my open questions here but to also be able to contribute a 
little bit to some threads.

Well, here I am!
My special greetings and thanks go to all the developers and all the 
active members of this community who made and make Debian.

Best wishes, from Europe,
Marco.

Actually, it was STUPID, not weird (cross-posted to Tomcat and Debian Lists): my BROWSER CACHES never got flushed!

[James H. H. Lampert]

I really can't believe I didn't think about the possibility that my 
browsers were both still caching the default root context from Tomcat 7 
when I did the port swap.


I definitely need to always remember to consider the possibility that 
I'm doing something stupid.


--
JHHL

Re: More, Re: This is weird (cross-posted to Tomcat and Debian Lists): Tomcat 8.5 is going to /var/lib/tomcat7/webapps/ROOT

[David Wright]

On Thu 07 Sep 2017 at 16:13:37 (-0700), James H. H. Lampert wrote:

> If I remember right, Linux file systems can have not only symbolic
> links to files, but also multiple hard links to the same file. Is
> there an easy way to look for something like that?

find  -type f ! -links 1 -exec ls -l {} \; | less

Cheers,
David.

Still more, Re: This is weird (cross-posted to Tomcat and Debian Lists): Tomcat 8.5 is going to /var/lib/tomcat7/webapps/ROOT

[James H. H. Lampert]

I also stuck a similar named trivial static context into 
/var/lib/tomcat7/webapps (with a different directory name: "foobar" in 
Tomcat 8, "bozbar" in Tomcat 7).


In theory, Tomcat 8.5 should be able to see the foobar context, but not 
the bozbar context; this is also true in practice.


So it's something specific to the root context.

--
James H. H. Lampert

More, Re: This is weird (cross-posted to Tomcat and Debian Lists): Tomcat 8.5 is going to /var/lib/tomcat7/webapps/ROOT

[James H. H. Lampert]

Just for grins, I put a trivial static context (nothing more than a 
directory containing a simple "index.html" file) into 
/var/lib/tomcat8/webapps. Tomcat 8.5 found it. So it's only the root 
context that's somehow getting redirected.


But on the other hand, if I rename var/lib/tomcat7/webapps/ROOT to 
"ROOTx," Tomcat 8.5 STILL finds that one (or at least its index.html).


Curiouser and curiouser.

If I remember right, Linux file systems can have not only symbolic links 
to files, but also multiple hard links to the same file. Is there an 
easy way to look for something like that?


--
James H. H. Lampert

Re: This is weird (cross-posted to Tomcat and Debian Lists): Tomcat 8.5 is going to /var/lib/tomcat7/webapps/ROOT

[deloptes]

James H. H. Lampert wrote:

> Pete Helgren (on the Tomcat List) wrote:
>> Longshotsomething in .profile of the user the Tomcat instance is
>> running under?
> 
> Neither the "tomcat7" nor "tomcat8" users have .profile files.
> 
> This is interesting. I got rid of the Tomcat 8.5 catalina.out files on
> both boxes (the one where everything works right, and the one where 8.5
> is getting 7's root context) and restarted them, and I got this at the
> tops of both catalina.out files:
> 

> 
> I'm still stumped. None of the configuration or log files I've looked in
> so far appear to have any references to anything in tomcat7.
> 
> --
> JHHL

Start with the startup.sh script - what's in there ... perhaps diff with the
one that works

Re: This is weird (cross-posted to Tomcat and Debian Lists): Tomcat 8.5 is going to /var/lib/tomcat7/webapps/ROOT

[James H. H. Lampert]

Pete Helgren (on the Tomcat List) wrote:

Longshotsomething in .profile of the user the Tomcat instance is
running under?


Neither the "tomcat7" nor "tomcat8" users have .profile files.

This is interesting. I got rid of the Tomcat 8.5 catalina.out files on 
both boxes (the one where everything works right, and the one where 8.5 
is getting 7's root context) and restarted them, and I got this at the 
tops of both catalina.out files:



WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/var/lib/tomcat8/common/classes], 
exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/var/lib/tomcat8/common], exists: 
[false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory 
[/usr/share/tomcat8/common/classes], exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], 
canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/usr/share/tomcat8/common], 
exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/var/lib/tomcat8/server/classes], 
exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/var/lib/tomcat8/server], exists: 
[false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory 
[/usr/share/tomcat8/server/classes], exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], 
canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/usr/share/tomcat8/server], 
exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/var/lib/tomcat8/shared/classes], 
exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/var/lib/tomcat8/shared], exists: 
[false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory 
[/usr/share/tomcat8/shared/classes], exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], 
canRead: [false]
WARNING [main] . . . Problem with directory [/usr/share/tomcat8/shared], 
exists: [false], isDirectory: [false], canRead: [false]


On both boxes, according to catalina.out, CATALINA_BASE is 
/var/lib/tomcat8 and CATALINA_HOME is /usr/share/tomcat8.


Then I get a bunch of stack traces. I'll omit the stack traces 
themselves for the sake of brevity, and give just the error messages:

 java.io.FileNotFoundException: /usr/share/java/el-api-3.0.jar (No such file or 
directory)
 java.io.FileNotFoundException: /usr/share/java/jsp-api-2.3.jar (No such file 
or directory)
 java.io.FileNotFoundException: /usr/share/java/el-api-3.0.jar (No such file or 
directory)
 java.io.FileNotFoundException: /usr/share/java/jsp-api-2.3.jar (No such file 
or directory)
 java.io.FileNotFoundException: /usr/share/java/el-api-3.0.jar (No such file or 
directory)
 java.io.FileNotFoundException: /usr/share/java/jsp-api-2.3.jar (No such file 
or directory)
and so forth, alternating back and forth between those two jar files 
several times.


I'm still stumped. None of the configuration or log files I've looked in 
so far appear to have any references to anything in tomcat7.


--
JHHL

This is weird (cross-posted to Tomcat and Debian Lists): Tomcat 8.5 is going to /var/lib/tomcat7/webapps/ROOT

[James H. H. Lampert]

I've got two separate boxes, both running Debian Jessie, with both 
Tomcat 7.0.56 and Tomcat 8.5.14 installed, all of the installations via 
an apt-get from Debian's repositories.


On one of the boxes (Tomcat 8.5 installed alongside Tomcat 7 with no 
previous Tomcat 8), Tomat 8 is somehow pulling the root context from 
Tomcat 7: the Tomcat 8.5 server is going to 
/var/lib/tomcat7/webapps/ROOT when it should be going to 
/var/lib/tomcat8/webapps/ROOT.


On the other box (Tomcat 8.5 installed on top of Tomcat 8.0, alongside 
Tomcat 7), the Tomcat 8.5 server is correctly finding 
/var/lib/tomcat8/webapps/ROOT.


On both boxes, Tomcat 8.5 is correctly finding its manager context at 
/usr/share/tomcat8-admin/manager, while Tomcat 7 finds its manager 
context at /usr/share/tomcat7-admin/manager.


The only difference is that on the box that's finding the correct root 
context, Tomcat 8.5 was installed on top of Tomcat 8.0, while on the one 
that's finding the wrong root context, it was installed without any 
previous Tomcat 8. In both cases, the installations were alongside 
existing Tomcat 7 installations.


Can anybody point me to the right haystack to find my needle?

--
James H. H. Lampert

Re: Spam on Debian lists

[Michael Fothergill]

On 21 April 2017 at 03:11, Cindy-Sue Causey 
wrote:

> On 4/20/17, Ben Finney  wrote:
> > Patrick Bartek  writes:
> >
> >> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > fc:
> >> > > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
> >> >
> >> > Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> >> > masters.
> >>
> >> Like what?
> >
> > I can't speak for the list masters, but I can speak for use cases that
> > would exclude that I find valid:
> >
> > * Posting from a service (such as a mailing list aggregator) which
> >   presents a single interface accessible without an email client.
> >
> > * Posting by people who we want to participate in the discussion, but
> >   who do not (yet) see the benefit to themselves of going through a
> >   subscription process.
>

​E.g. a post from Linus Torvalds, Lennart Poettering or a closed source
processed meat canned foods manufacturer that wanted to make a donation  to
the Debian Foundation.

Point Taken

MF​


> >
> > * Cross-posting on multiple forums when a discussion involves parties
> >   outside Debian, and we don't want the discussion balkanised with some
> >   people's responses rejected.
>
>
> I can't point to real World examples, but I've seen multiple instances
> of that last one occurring. Those not subscribed bore email addresses
> from extremely "top tier" tech companies
>
> The topics varied, but it would be conversations regarding things such
> as attempting to obtain more universal compatibility between Debian
> and non-free hardware. *Something* like that
>
> Just thinking out loud... :)
>
> Cindy
>
> --
> Cindy-Sue Causey
> Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA
>
> * runs with duct tape *
>
>

Re: Spam on Debian lists

[Dan Norton]

On 04/20/2017 05:52 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de>
wrote:


fc:

Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?

You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.


I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.

Your help is appreciated:
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam

Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).


*Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
list?

Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?

Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
masters.
  
Like what?


Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
One list I used required annual renewal..

B



+ 1

 - Dan

Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:52:39PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker 
> wrote:
> 
> > fc:
> > >
> > > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
> > 
> > You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
> > masters [...]

(not the OP, but -- thanks for that, BTW!)

> > > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
> > 
> > Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> > masters.
>  
> Like what?
> 
> Why not this:  [...]

You'd think this hasn't all been discussed. But it has. Extensively.
*If* you want to re-hash it here, then please, please: do some
homework first. Use your favourite search engine and try to dig up
some previous discussion.

The list's openness is *by design*, not by mistake. It's not because
all of "them" didn't come up with the Right Idea(TM)

Yes, sounds a bit harsh and all. But if you don't do some research
we're stuck in an endless loop.

Regards
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlj5tMYACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYYagCdFiuHX7DqllpZmIEpMsRTjvP1
ELUAn06Idn8t0fUNYuwRjUN051OtrubY
=o+Za
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Spam on Debian lists

[Cindy-Sue Causey]

On 4/20/17, Ben Finney  wrote:
> Patrick Bartek  writes:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > fc:
>> > > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>> >
>> > Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>> > masters.
>>
>> Like what?
>
> I can't speak for the list masters, but I can speak for use cases that
> would exclude that I find valid:
>
> * Posting from a service (such as a mailing list aggregator) which
>   presents a single interface accessible without an email client.
>
> * Posting by people who we want to participate in the discussion, but
>   who do not (yet) see the benefit to themselves of going through a
>   subscription process.
>
> * Cross-posting on multiple forums when a discussion involves parties
>   outside Debian, and we don't want the discussion balkanised with some
>   people's responses rejected.


I can't point to real World examples, but I've seen multiple instances
of that last one occurring. Those not subscribed bore email addresses
from extremely "top tier" tech companies

The topics varied, but it would be conversations regarding things such
as attempting to obtain more universal compatibility between Debian
and non-free hardware. *Something* like that

Just thinking out loud... :)

Cindy

-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA

* runs with duct tape *

Re: Spam on Debian lists

[Ben Finney]

Patrick Bartek  writes:

> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker 
> wrote:
>
> > fc:
> > > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
> > 
> > Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> > masters.
>
> Like what?

I can't speak for the list masters, but I can speak for use cases that
would exclude that I find valid:

* Posting from a service (such as a mailing list aggregator) which
  presents a single interface accessible without an email client.

* Posting by people who we want to participate in the discussion, but
  who do not (yet) see the benefit to themselves of going through a
  subscription process.

* Cross-posting on multiple forums when a discussion involves parties
  outside Debian, and we don't want the discussion balkanised with some
  people's responses rejected.

There are likely others, but that seems enough to answer the question.

-- 
 \   “The apparent lesson of the Inquisition is that insistence on |
  `\ uniformity of belief is fatal to intellectual, moral, and |
_o__)spiritual health.” —_The Uses Of The Past_, Herbert J. Muller |
Ben Finney

Re: Spam on Debian lists

[Joe Pfeiffer]

Joel Rees <joel.r...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Patrick Bartek <nemomm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> fc:
>>> >
>>> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>>>
>>> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
>>> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
>>> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>>>
>>> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
>>> > delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>>>
>>> Your help is appreciated:
>>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>>>
>>> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
>>> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
>>> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>>>
>>> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
>>> > list?
>>> >
>>> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>>>
>>> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>>> masters.
>>
>> Like what?
>>
>> Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
>> a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
>> do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
>> been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
>> One list I used required annual renewal..
>
> How do you limit posts to subscribers?
>
> Login?
> Subscriber list?

Yes, that's easily done -- check the From: against the subscriber list.

That isn't perfect; a list I administer gets occasional spam from the
forged email address of a subscriber; the list is so incredibly low
volume that it's OK for me to just moderate it.  That wouldn't be the
case here.

> What happens when you need an answer, but you don't have access to a
> functional machine that you can trust?
>
> Also, I think there is a web forum that functions more or less as you 
> describe:
>
> http://forums.debian.net/

Re: Spam on Debian lists

[Joe Pfeiffer]

Patrick Bartek <nemomm...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de>
> wrote:
>
>> fc:
>> >
>> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>> 
>> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
>> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
>> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>> 
>> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
>> > delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>> 
>> Your help is appreciated:
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>> 
>> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
>> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
>> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>> 
>> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
>> > list?
>> > 
>> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>> 
>> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>> masters.
>  
> Like what?
>
> Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
> a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
> do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
> been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
> One list I used required annual renewal..

That would preclude those of us who still read it on usenet.

Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

[Joel Rees]

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Patrick Bartek <nemomm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de>
> wrote:
>
>> fc:
>> >
>> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>>
>> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
>> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
>> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>>
>> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
>> > delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>>
>> Your help is appreciated:
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>>
>> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
>> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
>> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>>
>> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
>> > list?
>> >
>> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>>
>> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>> masters.
>
> Like what?
>
> Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
> a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
> do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
> been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
> One list I used required annual renewal..

How do you limit posts to subscribers?

Login?
Subscriber list?

What happens when you need an answer, but you don't have access to a
functional machine that you can trust?

Also, I think there is a web forum that functions more or less as you describe:

http://forums.debian.net/

-- 
Joel Rees

I'm imagining I'm a novelist:
http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.com/2017/01/soc500-00-00-toc.html
More of my delusions:
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html

Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

[Patrick Bartek]

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de>
wrote:

> fc:
> >
> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
> 
> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
> 
> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
> > delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
> 
> Your help is appreciated:
> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
> 
> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
> 
> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
> > list?
> > 
> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
> 
> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> masters.
 
Like what?

Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
One list I used required annual renewal..

B

Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

[Michael Fothergill]

On 20 April 2017 at 21:40, Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de> wrote:

> fc:
> >
> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>
> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300 Debian
> lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>
> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1 delete on
> the
> > front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>
> Your help is appreciated:
> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>
> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job that
> anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>
> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this list?
> >
> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>
> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> masters.
>

​Especially queries about the relative merits of sysinit vs systemd in
Debian.

MF​


>
> J.
> --
> I wish I had been aware enough to enjoy my time as a toddler.
> [Agree]   [Disagree]
>  <http://archive.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/
> data_enter2.html>
>

Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

[Jochen Spieker]

fc:
>
> Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?

You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300 Debian
lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.

> I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1 delete on the
> front end could prevent a lot of woe.

Your help is appreciated:
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam

Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job that
anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).

> *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this list?
> 
> Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?

Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
masters.

J.
-- 
I wish I had been aware enough to enjoy my time as a toddler.
[Agree]   [Disagree]
 <http://archive.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Denigrating messages on Debian lists [Re: [ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net: Re: Mail client, threads, etc...]]

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 10:28 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
  On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:10:11 +0100
  fra...@tourde.org (François TOURDE) wrote:
  
   - Errare humanum est, but to make a big mistake, you need a
   computer ;)
  
  Or a woman. I hope this isn't too sexist.
 
 Sending messages which denigrate members of the Debian community
 aren't acceptable on Debian lists.
 
 If you have to ask yourself whether something is denigrating others,
 it probably is.
 
 Please refrain from doing so in the future, or listmast...@debian.org
 may take action to curtail your posting ability to Debian lists.
 
 
 Don Armstrong
 (on behalf of listmast...@lists.debian.org)

You've got the impression I denigrated members of the list after reading
the threads with this misunderstanding from the beginning to the end? Or
did you just read this quote without the context?

Especially this Lisi often felt offended, even by newbies that e.g.
carbon copy to her, when they replied or write HTML mails. So this S/N
ratio is ok, but a harmless joke is a sin?

I can't do anything else, than to explain and to apologize.

If this list is for denunciators, that can't forgive, can't accept a
pardon.

Pff!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1353523528.19877.8.camel@q

Re: Denigrating messages on Debian lists [Re: [ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net: Re: Mail client, threads, etc...]]

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 19:45 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 10:28 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
   On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:10:11 +0100
   fra...@tourde.org (François TOURDE) wrote:
   
- Errare humanum est, but to make a big mistake, you need a
computer ;)
   
   Or a woman. I hope this isn't too sexist.
  
  Sending messages which denigrate members of the Debian community
  aren't acceptable on Debian lists.
  
  If you have to ask yourself whether something is denigrating others,
  it probably is.
  
  Please refrain from doing so in the future, or listmast...@debian.org
  may take action to curtail your posting ability to Debian lists.
  
  
  Don Armstrong
  (on behalf of listmast...@lists.debian.org)
 
 You've got the impression I denigrated members of the list after reading
 the threads with this misunderstanding from the beginning to the end? Or
 did you just read this quote without the context?
 
 Especially this Lisi often felt offended, even by newbies that e.g.
 carbon copy to her, when they replied or write HTML mails. So this S/N
 ratio is ok, but a harmless joke is a sin?
 
 I can't do anything else, than to explain and to apologize.
 
 If this list is for denunciators, that can't forgive, can't accept a
 pardon.

Oops,

then 'm willing to unsubscribe myself. Was this a PM? If so, Lisi does
sent PMs to the list too.
 
 Pff!

It's ridiculous to make a mountain out of a dust speck.

Bye!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1353523741.19877.11.camel@q

Re: Denigrating messages on Debian lists [Re: [ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net: Re: Mail client, threads, etc...]]

[François TOURDE]

Le 15665ième jour après Epoch,
Ralf Mardorf écrivait:

 On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 10:28 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
  On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:10:11 +0100
  fra...@tourde.org (François TOURDE) wrote:
  
   - Errare humanum est, but to make a big mistake, you need a
   computer ;)
  
  Or a woman. I hope this isn't too sexist.
 
 Sending messages which denigrate members of the Debian community
 aren't acceptable on Debian lists.

I'm so sorry denigrating computers on my initial sentence, I apologize.

If I look at the two sentences, Ralf's one is equipollent to mine, so I
consider it harmful for computers and I apologize.

 Please refrain from doing so in the future, or listmast...@debian.org
 may take action to curtail your posting ability to Debian lists.

I agree.

/F - Happy french native ;)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87txsid158@tourde.org

Re (3): message threading in debian lists.

[peasthope]

From:   Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com
Date:   Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:12:47 -0700
 And you have been having such trouble with your vpn(s).  To me that is
 like a house of cards.  A light breeze blows it over.  In order to be
 more robust it needs to be simpler, less rigid, and more flexible.

Iprovements in progress.  Will reply after my documentation page 
is updated.

 But you asked the question!  :-) It isn't fair to ask a question, get
 an answer, and then complain about it.  :-)  That is dirty dealing!

OK, sorry, sorry.  My disappointment is with http://lists.debian.org/ ; 
not with your answer.  I've added this section. 
  
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMailingLists#MessageThreadingandReplyingtoaQuestion;
The preceeding sub-section, How to continue a discussion,  is inadequate.

Some archived messages have links under the heading References.
In some cases there is more than one layer of reference.  Presumeably 
the list software traces back recursively.  Also there are Follow-ups.
A retroactive edit must occur to make one of these.  Any additional 
ideas?

If there are any comments or suggestions I am happy to continue work 
on the wiki page.  Anyone who is registered can edit the page of course.

Regards,  ... Peter E.





-- 
Telephone 1 360 450 2132.
Shop pages http://carnot.yi.org/ accessible as long as the old drives survive.
Personal pages http://members.shaw.ca/peasthope/ .


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/171056890.45653.31504@cantor.invalid

Re: Re (2): message threading in debian lists; was Re (6): OpenVPN server mode usage.

[Lisi]

On Wednesday 19 January 2011 04:12:47 Bob Proulx wrote:
 peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
  Bob Proulx wrote:
   You have a complicated setup!
 
  A complex setup.  complicated is a verb.  ... Sorry.

 Uhm...  No.  Complicated is an adjective.

  From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:

complicated
adj : difficult to analyze or understand; a complicated problem;
  complicated Middle East politics

I agree with Bob.

I have checked in several dictionaries.  The Shorter Oxford, 1944 would agree 
with you.  I have checked in three others, more recently published, and they 
all have complicated as an adjective.  Here is one:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/complicated

Moreover, even if it had not already, some time ago, entered the language as 
an adjective, I would contend that it is perfectly legitimate to use a past 
participle adjectivally.  Think of e.g. a tried and tested method.

Lisi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201101191618.11180.lisi.re...@gmail.com

Re (2): message threading in debian lists; was Re (6): OpenVPN server mode usage.

[peasthope]

From:   Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com
Date:   Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:59:42 -0700
 You have a complicated setup!

A complex setup.  complicated is a verb.  ... Sorry.

It's simplifying slowly and surely.  One helpful detail is to 
route to a LAN rather than to individual machines.
route 172.23.0.0 255.255.0.0
rather than
# Curie
route 172.23.4.2
# Heaviside
route 172.23.5.2

From:   Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com
Date:   Wed, 12 Jan 2011 11:53:04 -0700
 But since you have routes to public IP space there perhaps you would
 want to route all of your traffic over the vpn (once you have it
 working) and then you wouldn't need specific routes for everything.

Dalton has a relatively fast connection to the 'net 
provided by the university.  Joule at home has a 
relatively slow connection to the net through shaw.ca.  
Are you suggesting that all of dalton's 'net traffic 
go through the tunnel and Joule?  Are you suggesting 
that all of joule's 'net traffic go through the tunnel 
and dalton?  Aren't both significantly disadvantageous? 

 Standard email headers apply.  RFC 2822 would cover them. 

Certainly, but how many new Debian users will find RFC 2822, study 
it and perceive how threading works when subscribing to debian-user?  
I might try adding a brief note about threading in 
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/MailingLists and I wonder how many 
new users will find that.

Regards, ... Peter E.

-- 
Telephone 1 360 450 2132.
Shop pages http://carnot.yi.org/ accessible as long as the old drives survive.
Personal pages http://members.shaw.ca/peasthope/ .


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/171056882.74741.66673@cantor.invalid

Re: Re (2): message threading in debian lists; was Re (6): OpenVPN server mode usage.

[Bob Proulx]

peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
 Bob Proulx wrote:
  You have a complicated setup!
 
 A complex setup.  complicated is a verb.  ... Sorry.

Uhm...  No.  Complicated is an adjective.

 From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:

   complicated
   adj : difficult to analyze or understand; a complicated problem;
 complicated Middle East politics

 It's simplifying slowly and surely.  One helpful detail is to 
 route to a LAN rather than to individual machines.
 route 172.23.0.0 255.255.0.0
 rather than
 # Curie
 route 172.23.4.2
 # Heaviside
 route 172.23.5.2

Yes.  Definitely yes.  Simpler is better.

  But since you have routes to public IP space there perhaps you would
  want to route all of your traffic over the vpn (once you have it
  working) and then you wouldn't need specific routes for everything.
 
 Dalton has a relatively fast connection to the 'net 
 provided by the university.  Joule at home has a 
 relatively slow connection to the net through shaw.ca.  

 Are you suggesting that all of dalton's 'net traffic 
 go through the tunnel and Joule?  Are you suggesting 
 that all of joule's 'net traffic go through the tunnel 
 and dalton?  Aren't both significantly disadvantageous? 

I am suggesting that you have such a complicated routing setup that it
is causing you difficulty and that you should simplify it by some
method.  You listed five (5!) route commands in your configuration.

 # Machines in the local home zone reached _via_ the tunnel.
 # Curie
 route 172.23.4.2
 # Heaviside
 route 172.23.5.2
 # Shaw mail servers _via_ the tunnel.
 # route shawmail.gv.shawcable.net
 route 64.59.128.135
 route 24.71.223.43
 # Shaw ftp server _via_ the tunnel.
 # route ftp.shaw.ca
 route 64.59.128.134

And you have been having such trouble with your vpn(s).  To me that is
like a house of cards.  A light breeze blows it over.  In order to be
more robust it needs to be simpler, less rigid, and more flexible.

  Standard email headers apply.  RFC 2822 would cover them. 
 
 Certainly, but how many new Debian users will find RFC 2822, study 
 it and perceive how threading works when subscribing to debian-user?  

But you asked the question!  :-) It isn't fair to ask a question, get
an answer, and then complain about it.  :-)  That is dirty dealing!

In response I will only say that most users will simply use an MUA
(mail user agent) and will simply use it (mutt, thunderbird, gmail,
whatever) to generate follow-ups.  It is the MUA's job to do the right
thing with respect to email headers.  Let's hope the author of the MUA
actually took the time to read the RFCs.

Bob


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Re (2): message threading in debian lists; was Re (6): OpenVPN server mode usage.

[Mike Bird]

On Tue January 18 2011 20:12:47 Bob Proulx wrote:
 peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
  Are you suggesting that all of dalton's 'net traffic
  go through the tunnel and Joule?  Are you suggesting
  that all of joule's 'net traffic go through the tunnel
  and dalton?  Aren't both significantly disadvantageous?

 I am suggesting that you have such a complicated routing setup that it
 is causing you difficulty and that you should simplify it by some
 method.  You listed five (5!) route commands in your configuration.

Once your routing gets that complexicational you might
want to consider using a routing deamon such as Quagga.

You could probably use OSPF over the tunnels but we
prefer to use private BGP, with each office and laptop
and customer office network a separate private AS.

BGP gives us better control of route propagation than
OSPF.  For example sysadmin laptops can communicate with
customer office networks for maintenance purposes but
customer office networks cannot see each other.

--Mike Bird


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201101182107.47481.mgb-deb...@yosemite.net

message threading in debian lists; was Re (6): OpenVPN server mode usage.

[peasthope]

Bob,

From:   Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com
Date:   Wed, 12 Jan 2011 11:22:23 -0700
 Every reply of yours is starting a new thread.  You can see this in
 the mailing list archives.

Apologies.  I understand and certainly would prefer not do that.  

 This is an aside but why is the subject being modified with a  (#)
 before the colon in Re:?  Converting Re: to Re (5): for this
 message for example?  That causes the attempt to fall back without
 In-Reply-To: to grouping messages by subject to be unable to do so.

I'll explain all the cases for benefit of anyone who might be interested.
Some of the information at http://carnot.yi.org/NetworksPage.html 
might help.

The simplest is when I am at home and have a direct link to the ISP 
and POP3 brings messages from the ISP to the home workstation, 
heaviside, and SMTP takes messages from heaviside to the ISP.  A message 
from debian-user can be read as an emessage or from the Web archive.  
In both cases the Message-id is available and I can insert it as the 
value of In-reply-to in a reply.  lists.debian.org uses that message-id to 
connect the thread.  So far, so good.

A second case is when I am at work and the tunnel between dalton 
and joule is working properly.  Then POP3 brings messages from the 
ISP to cantor via the tunnel and SMTP takes messages to the ISP.  
Email works the same for cantor as for heaviside in the case above.
Still good.

A third case is when I am at work and the tunnel between dalton 
and joule is broken.  Then POP3 can bring messages from the ISP 
through the public Internet to cantor;  but the ISP will not accept 
a message from cantor via SMTP through the public Internet.  In 
this case messages must be sent through the Web interface of the ISP.  
Presumeably it's this Web software which inserts  (#).  Now if a 
message is read on cantor I have difficulty.  The message-id is visible 
on cantor but I do not know of any way to have the Web interface 
accept an In-reply-to parameter.  That's when a new thread begins.

If the tunnel is broken I could simply refrain from retrieving mail to 
the MUA on cantor and read all mail with the Web based interface.  
If a reply is created, the correct value for In-reply-to will be generated 
automatically.  My objection is that the Web interface is unbearably 
slow and clumsy.  The tunnel is working again now and with any luck, 
will continue to do so for several years.  As long as the tunnel works I 
can connect messages properly.

Is threading of messages in Debian lists explained anywhere?  I've never 
seen an explanation.  A few years ago I found how to use Message-id 
and In-reply-to by exploration rather than straightforward reading.  

Regards,  ... Peter E.





-- 
Telephone 1 360 450 2132.
Shop pages http://carnot.yi.org/ accessible as long as the old drives survive.
Personal pages http://members.shaw.ca/peasthope/ .


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/171056881.47301.39653@heaviside.invalid

Re: message threading in debian lists; was Re (6): OpenVPN server mode usage.

[Bob Proulx]

peasth...@shaw.ca wrote:
 A third case is when I am at work and the tunnel between dalton 

You have a complicated setup!

 and joule is broken.  Then POP3 can bring messages from the ISP 
 through the public Internet to cantor;  but the ISP will not accept 
 a message from cantor via SMTP through the public Internet.  In 
 this case messages must be sent through the Web interface of the ISP.  
 Presumeably it's this Web software which inserts  (#).  Now if a 
 message is read on cantor I have difficulty.

That is not very nice of them.

It is good that your tunnel is back working again so that you can
avoid some of the problems.

 The message-id is visible on cantor but I do not know of any way to
 have the Web interface accept an In-reply-to parameter.  That's when
 a new thread begins.

It must be more than this because the Subject line is also modified.
Not having an In-Reply-To isn't changing the subject line.  (shrug)

 If the tunnel is broken I could simply refrain from retrieving mail to 
 the MUA on cantor and read all mail with the Web based interface.  

It wasn't the end of the world.  It was just annoying and so I noted it.

 Is threading of messages in Debian lists explained anywhere?  I've never 
 seen an explanation.  A few years ago I found how to use Message-id 
 and In-reply-to by exploration rather than straightforward reading.  

Standard email headers apply.  RFC 2822 would cover them.  Though
perhaps the wikipedia page is more readable.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email#Message_header

Bob




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Spam on Debian lists

[Andrei Popescu]

Dear debian-user readers,

Because Debian has a policy of open lists (posting allowed without 
subscribing) it may happen that the occasional spam will pass the 
*excellent* filters. In such cases, please:

- do not reply to the spam message, it makes it impossible to clean the 
  archives afterwards. It's even worse if you quote (even partially) the 
  spam, because this confuses the filters
- if you really have to post something to debian-user about that 
  particular message, please start a new thread and don't quote any 
  parts of it
- if you want to help with cleaning the archives please bounce[1][2] the 
  message to report-lists...@lists.debian.org.

See also http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam

[1] this is mutt terminology, it might be called 'redirect' in other 
mail clients, but it's definitely not a forward

[2] will not work with Gmail as a smarthost, since they also filter 
outgoing mail

Just another reader,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Are there any default pasteboards for Debian lists?

[Klistvud]

Howdie, fellow Debianites!

I was just wondering if there are any default web sites where one can 
post attachments/snippets which are too long to fit in a normal e-mail? 
Do Debian lists have any such preferred locations? And, by the way: are 
such services called pasteboards at all? (English is not my native 
language).

-- 
Regards, and TIA!

Klistvud
Certifiable Loonix User #481801


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Are there any default pasteboards for Debian lists?

[Andrei Popescu]

On Sun,01.Nov.09, 10:57:17, Klistvud wrote:
 Howdie, fellow Debianites!
 
 I was just wondering if there are any default web sites where one can 
 post attachments/snippets which are too long to fit in a normal e-mail? 
 Do Debian lists have any such preferred locations? And, by the way: are 
 such services called pasteboards at all? (English is not my native 
 language).

How about paste.debian.net? How long is the output anyway?

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Are there any default pasteboards for Debian lists?

[Klistvud]

Dne, 01. 11. 2009 11:43:21 je Andrei Popescu napisal(a):
 
 How about paste.debian.net? How long is the output anyway?

Oh, there's no output yet. I was just wondering, for any future 
occasions I might need it.

Thanx


-- 
Regards,

Klistvud
Certifiable Loonix User #481801


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Are there any default pasteboards for Debian lists?

[Jack Schneider]

On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 12:04:55 +0100
Klistvud quotati...@aliceadsl.fr wrote:

 Dne, 01. 11. 2009 11:43:21 je Andrei Popescu napisal(a):
  
  How about paste.debian.net? How long is the output anyway?
 
 Oh, there's no output yet. I was just wondering, for any future 
 occasions I might need it.
 
 Thanx
 
 
Hi, Try http://pastebin.com
 
FWIW  Jack


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Are there any default pasteboards for Debian lists?

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 07:28:29AM -0600, Jack Schneider wrote:

 Hi, Try http://pastebin.com

This is also the default of the package pastebinit .

Another thing to note: if you want to post a message to this list and
reference a pastebin post, consider that chance are that in a week or so
it will expire, and anybody reading the archives of the list will have
problems understanding what you meant.

-- 
Tzafrir Cohen | tzaf...@jabber.org | VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's
tzaf...@cohens.org.il ||  best
ICQ# 16849754 || friend


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

[OT] FW: Re: Spurious DSNs When Sending Messages to Debian Lists

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

It's not entirely on-topic for the list, but a thread has already started, so 
I figured I would forward this along.

On Monday 12 October 2009 14:23:35 Don Armstrong wrote:
 On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
  As of about a week or so ago, I began receiving DSNs for each message I
  sent to the mailing list.  Each DSN indicated that message delivery had
  failed, but the message did arrive at the list (I saw my own message) and
  in the list archives (I was able to view my message via the web
  interface).

 I've actually just identified the individual in question and have
 unsusbcribed them. Let listmas...@lists.debian.org know if you see any
 more for messages sent after you've received this message.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Tiago Saboga]

Sven Joachim svenj...@gmx.de writes:
 You can use gnus-parameters to set up all Debian groups (i.e. mailing
 lists) at once.  The following untested example assumes that mail sent
 to debian-...@lists.debian.org end up in a debian.foo nnml group:

 (setq gnus-parameters
   '((nnml:debian\\.\\(.*\\)$
(to-address . debian-...@lists.debian.org)
(to-list . debian-...@lists.debian.org)
(subscribed . t)))

Thanks Sven, it seems it's exactly what I need. I will try it soon.

 Use with caution and be sure to read the Group Parameters section in
 the Gnus manual.

Yes, I will read it again. But I have to say that I find the gnus manual
really confusing, perhaps because I do not have a news background, and I
fail to understand several of the underlying concepts.

Tiago.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Sven Joachim]

On 2009-05-18 02:25 +0200, Tiago Saboga wrote:

 I am moving from mutt to gnus, and I am missing a description of how to
 make gnus behave the right way when dealing with debian lists. I use
 fetchmail to get messages from my ISP, and a strange combination of
 procmail and maildrop to filter them into mboxes, where each mailing
 list has its own inbox. Gnus takes messages there and stores them in its
 nnml backend. Now I would like gnus to know that whenever I reply to any
 debian list, it is to send my reply only to the list, except if
 explicitly told otherwise (it should also do the right thing if it finds
 mail-followup-to and reply-to headers, and I don't even know what is the
 right thing in that case).

You can achieve this using group parameters, e.g. I have the following
parameters for this list:

((to-address . debian-user@lists.debian.org)
 (to-list . debian-user@lists.debian.org)
 (subscribed . t))

This ensures that follow-ups and new posts go the list and
Mail-Followup-To is set.  See (Info (gnus) Group Parameters) for more
information.  Note that you should reply with follow-up (bound to F)
and not reply-all (bound to S W) if you want to reply to the list
only.

Sven


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Nicolas KOWALSKI]

Tiago Saboga tiagosab...@gmail.com writes:

 I am moving from mutt to gnus, and I am missing a description of how to
 make gnus behave the right way when dealing with debian lists. I use
 fetchmail to get messages from my ISP, and a strange combination of
 procmail and maildrop to filter them into mboxes, where each mailing
 list has its own inbox. Gnus takes messages there and stores them in its
 nnml backend. Now I would like gnus to know that whenever I reply to any
 debian list, it is to send my reply only to the list, except if
 explicitly told otherwise (it should also do the right thing if it finds
 mail-followup-to and reply-to headers, and I don't even know what is the
 right thing in that case).

Yes, this is documented in the group parameters manual, about the
'to-address' parameter:

http://www.gnus.org/manual/gnus_28.html#SEC28


For example, I have in my ~/.gnus:

(setq 

 ;; 
 ;; Define some parameters, on the group name basis.
 ;;
 gnus-parameters
 '(

   (^nnimap:list.debian-french 
(to-address . debian-user-fre...@lists.debian.org)
)
   
   (^nnimap:list.debian 
(to-address . debian-user@lists.debian.org)
)

   (^nnimap:list.gnus
(to-address . info-gnus-engl...@gnu.org)
)
  )
 )


When replying to your post, I used 'F' (followup), and Gnus used the
debian-user@lists.debian.org address instead of your own mail address
in the To: field.

-- 
Nicolas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Tiago Saboga]

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Tiago Saboga]

Sven Joachim svenj...@gmx.de writes:

 On 2009-05-18 02:25 +0200, Tiago Saboga wrote:

 I am moving from mutt to gnus, and I am missing a description of how to
 make gnus behave the right way when dealing with debian lists. I use
 fetchmail to get messages from my ISP, and a strange combination of
 procmail and maildrop to filter them into mboxes, where each mailing
 list has its own inbox. Gnus takes messages there and stores them in its
 nnml backend. Now I would like gnus to know that whenever I reply to any
 debian list, it is to send my reply only to the list, except if
 explicitly told otherwise (it should also do the right thing if it finds
 mail-followup-to and reply-to headers, and I don't even know what is the
 right thing in that case).

 You can achieve this using group parameters, e.g. I have the following
 parameters for this list:

 ((to-address . debian-user@lists.debian.org)
  (to-list . debian-user@lists.debian.org)
  (subscribed . t))

 This ensures that follow-ups and new posts go the list and
 Mail-Followup-To is set.  See (Info (gnus) Group Parameters) for more
 information.  Note that you should reply with follow-up (bound to F)
 and not reply-all (bound to S W) if you want to reply to the list
 only.

Thanks to everyone who answered. It's what I am doing right now for this
list (via customization, as I am not yet comfortable with all gnus
variables), but I am subscribed to more than 10 debian lists and I would
not like to do this manual configuration for each of them. How do I say
to gnus: Everytime I reply to a debian list, I want my message to go
only to the list, except if I tell you otherwise?


Tiago.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Paul Johnson]

Tiago Saboga wrote:

 Thanks to everyone who answered. It's what I am doing right now for this
 list (via customization, as I am not yet comfortable with all gnus
 variables), but I am subscribed to more than 10 debian lists and I would
 not like to do this manual configuration for each of them. How do I say
 to gnus: Everytime I reply to a debian list, I want my message to go
 only to the list, except if I tell you otherwise?

Subscribe to the mailing lists via news.gmane.org instead of via direct
mail:  Gnus handles this the way you describe by default for newsgroups.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Tiago Saboga]

Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org writes:

 Tiago Saboga wrote:

 Thanks to everyone who answered. It's what I am doing right now for this
 list (via customization, as I am not yet comfortable with all gnus
 variables), but I am subscribed to more than 10 debian lists and I would
 not like to do this manual configuration for each of them. How do I say
 to gnus: Everytime I reply to a debian list, I want my message to go
 only to the list, except if I tell you otherwise?

 Subscribe to the mailing lists via news.gmane.org instead of via direct
 mail:  Gnus handles this the way you describe by default for newsgroups.

Thanks for the tip; yet I would rather use only mail; I have never used
news and already have my system configured for mailing lists (procmail
filters). 

Tiago.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Sven Joachim]

On 2009-05-18 11:53 +0200, Tiago Saboga wrote:

 Sven Joachim svenj...@gmx.de writes:

 On 2009-05-18 02:25 +0200, Tiago Saboga wrote:

 I am moving from mutt to gnus, and I am missing a description of how to
 make gnus behave the right way when dealing with debian lists. I use
 fetchmail to get messages from my ISP, and a strange combination of
 procmail and maildrop to filter them into mboxes, where each mailing
 list has its own inbox. Gnus takes messages there and stores them in its
 nnml backend. Now I would like gnus to know that whenever I reply to any
 debian list, it is to send my reply only to the list, except if
 explicitly told otherwise (it should also do the right thing if it finds
 mail-followup-to and reply-to headers, and I don't even know what is the
 right thing in that case).

 You can achieve this using group parameters, e.g. I have the following
 parameters for this list:

 ((to-address . debian-user@lists.debian.org)
  (to-list . debian-user@lists.debian.org)
  (subscribed . t))

 This ensures that follow-ups and new posts go the list and
 Mail-Followup-To is set.  See (Info (gnus) Group Parameters) for more
 information.  Note that you should reply with follow-up (bound to F)
 and not reply-all (bound to S W) if you want to reply to the list
 only.

 Thanks to everyone who answered. It's what I am doing right now for this
 list (via customization, as I am not yet comfortable with all gnus
 variables), but I am subscribed to more than 10 debian lists and I would
 not like to do this manual configuration for each of them. How do I say
 to gnus: Everytime I reply to a debian list, I want my message to go
 only to the list, except if I tell you otherwise?

You can use gnus-parameters to set up all Debian groups (i.e. mailing
lists) at once.  The following untested example assumes that mail sent
to debian-...@lists.debian.org end up in a debian.foo nnml group:

(setq gnus-parameters
  '((nnml:debian\\.\\(.*\\)$
 (to-address . debian-...@lists.debian.org)
 (to-list . debian-...@lists.debian.org)
 (subscribed . t)))

Use with caution and be sure to read the Group Parameters section in
the Gnus manual.

Sven


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Tiago Saboga]

I am moving from mutt to gnus, and I am missing a description of how to
make gnus behave the right way when dealing with debian lists. I use
fetchmail to get messages from my ISP, and a strange combination of
procmail and maildrop to filter them into mboxes, where each mailing
list has its own inbox. Gnus takes messages there and stores them in its
nnml backend. Now I would like gnus to know that whenever I reply to any
debian list, it is to send my reply only to the list, except if
explicitly told otherwise (it should also do the right thing if it finds
mail-followup-to and reply-to headers, and I don't even know what is the
right thing in that case).

I am certain that I can find a way to solve that problem, but I am sure
I am not the first to face it, and I would rather not duplicate work ;)

Tiago.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: make gnus reply correctly to debian lists

[Paul Johnson]

 make gnus behave the right way when dealing with debian lists. I use
 fetchmail to get messages from my ISP, and a strange combination of
 procmail and maildrop to filter them into mboxes, where each mailing
 list has its own inbox. Gnus takes messages there and stores them in it=
s
 nnml backend. Now I would like gnus to know that whenever I reply to an=
y
 debian list, it is to send my reply only to the list, except if
 explicitly told otherwise (it should also do the right thing if it find=
s
 mail-followup-to and reply-to headers, and I don't even know what is th=
e
 right thing in that case).
=20
 I am certain that I can find a way to solve that problem, but I am sure=


I believe you want to followup and not reply, in that case.  Or use
gnus to read the list on gmane instead.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

NO mail from Debian lists..

[Jack Schneider]

Hi, 

Anyone seeing mail???

Jack


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: NO mail from Debian lists..

[Pol Hallen]

 Anyone seeing mail???
:-)

Pol


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: NO mail from Debian lists..

[David Natkins]

I just saw yours.

-Original Message-
From: Pol Hallen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:53 AM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Cc: Jack Schneider
Subject: Re: NO mail from Debian lists..

 Anyone seeing mail???
:-)

Pol


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




  

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: About newsgroups related to debian lists

[Rodolfo Medina]

Rodolfo Medina wrote:

 In my experience, it is possible to read and send messages to debian lists
 in at least three ways: e.g., the present one: 
 via `debian-user' mailing list; through `linux.debian.user' newsgroup;
 through `gmane.linux.debian.user' newsgroup.

 Now, I realised that `gmane.linux.debian.user' preserves the message's
 original headers, whereas `linux.debian.user' changes the Message ID
 into a different value.

 I'd like to know other users' experience about this matter:
 is it normal? Does it maybe depend on the nntp server?
 What can you tell about it?
 


Paul Johnson wrote:

 Different mail to news gateways.  The gmane.* heirarchy is generally the
 best mail to news gateways.



T [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 2nd to that. 



Sorry, what do you mean with `2nd to that'? (My English is not very good.)
Maybe you mean there's a newsgroup hierarchy that works even better
than gmane.* with news gateways?



T:

 Moreover, Rodolfo, are you sure that you can post to linux.debian.user?



Yes, I can, I subscribed the linux-gate mailing list.
Cheers,
Rodolfo


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: About newsgroups related to debian lists

[T]

On Wed, 24 May 2006 22:39:47 +0200, Rodolfo Medina wrote:

 Paul Johnson wrote:

 Different mail to news gateways.  The gmane.* heirarchy is generally
 the best mail to news gateways.
 
 T [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 2nd to that.
 
 Sorry, what do you mean with `2nd to that'? (My English is not very good.)
 Maybe you mean there's a newsgroup hierarchy that works even better than
 gmane.* with news gateways?

Oh, I was just saying, I agree with that.

 Moreover, Rodolfo, are you sure that you can post to linux.debian.user?
 
 Yes, I can, I subscribed the linux-gate mailing list. Cheers, Rodolfo

thanks for the info. 



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: About newsgroups related to debian lists

[T]

On Sun, 21 May 2006 10:11:28 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:

 On Sunday 21 May 2006 09:18, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
 
 Now, I realised that `gmane.linux.debian.user' preserves the message's
 original headers, whereas `linux.debian.user' changes the Message ID
 into a different value.
 
 Different mail to news gateways.  The gmane.* heirarchy is generally the
 best mail to news gateways.

2nd to that. 

Moreover, Rodolfo, are you sure that you can post to linux.debian.user?

tong



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

About newsgroups related to debian lists

[Rodolfo Medina]

Hi, all.

In my experience, it is possible to read and send messages to debian lists
in at least three ways: e.g., the present one: 
via `debian-user' mailing list; through `linux.debian.user' newsgroup;
through `gmane.linux.debian.user' newsgroup.

Now, I realised that `gmane.linux.debian.user' preserves the message's
original headers, whereas `linux.debian.user' changes the Message ID
into a different value.

I'd like to know other users' experience about this matter:
is it normal? Does it maybe depend on the nntp server?
What can you tell about it?

Thanks,
Rodolfo


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: About newsgroups related to debian lists

[Paul Johnson]

On Sunday 21 May 2006 09:18, Rodolfo Medina wrote:

 Now, I realised that `gmane.linux.debian.user' preserves the message's
 original headers, whereas `linux.debian.user' changes the Message ID
 into a different value.

Different mail to news gateways.  The gmane.* heirarchy is generally the best 
mail to news gateways.

-- 
Paul Johnson
Email and IM (XMPP  Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jabber: Because it's time to move forward  http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber


pgpg54FNdJiZ2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

debian lists subscription options

[riteshsarraf]

Hi,

Is there a way to subscribe to debian-* mailing lists with mail
delivery turned off?

Thanks,
Ritesh

--
Ritesh Raj Sarraf
RESEARCHUT -- http://www.researchut.com
Necessity is the mother of invention
Stealing logics from one person is plagiarism, stealing from many is
researchut

Re: debian lists subscription options

[Jacob S]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 21:12:29 +0530
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hi,
 
 Is there a way to subscribe to debian-* mailing lists with mail
 delivery turned off?

No, but you can post if you're not subscribed. 

HTH,
Jacob
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEGaa+kpJ43hY3cTURAsulAKCLtDGsTwTsG/Zq6RuF7ujhAsBfZgCfdWfV
XCb+RrFFxhp9f3UDgsiBHO0=
=C3Rj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: RE: SPAM WARNING: spammers use Debian lists for harvesting

[samgamgee]

i certainly hope so


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[David Jardine]

All clear.  Thanks a lot!


On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 09:46:30PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
 Incoming from David Jardine:
  On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 04:43:43PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
   Incoming from David Jardine:

What worries me is the spam that is sent out under my name.  Just 
   
   I get bounces from clueless mail admins all the time.  If they'd spend
   two seconds scanning the original's Received: headers, they'd know I
   had nothing to do with it.  Blast it back to those fools and tell them
  
  The messages I've been receiving (was receiving - I haven't had any 
  today - perhaps they're using your address now) were polite 
  (automated, I imagine) statements of inabilty to deliver the message 
 
 Those are the ones I was talking about.  no such user or account
 not found or some such.
 
  - no accusations of spamming.  There must be masses of email flying 
 
 It was me assuming it was a spammer with an old address list.  An
 email sent to fifty bad email addresses at AOHell using my From:
 doesn't sound like a legitimate, well maintained, opt-in mailing list.
 It sounds like a spammer forging my From: address.
 
  around all the time with mis-typed addresses; isn't the appropriate 
  response to return it to the apparent sender?  That's a real question, 
  not a rhetorical one.
 
 Once, it was.  Now, 65% - 80% of network traffic is spam or malware.
 Now, it's smarter to assume that if you sent Joe an email and don't
 hear back within a couple of days, either Joe's on holidays or his
 spam filter is set too tight, so you should send him another one or
 call him.  Sending something that instead looks (to your average
 Windows user) like a MTA error message is a waste of time, effort,
 and bandwidth.
 
  The worry I had was about the reject messages I didn't get.  If the 
  Peoria Inter-Denominational College of Neo-Tibetan Goldfish Juggling 
  received thirty of my dollops of spam, who else was getting them and 
  was I being put on blacklists by, well, clueless mail admins and 
  fools with idiotic mail-bots?
 
 The clueless might report you, but those who actually manage said
 lists aren't that dumb.  There needs to be some pretty damning
 evidence that's provably from you to hurt you.  Alternatively, your
 ISP could be so clueless as to let the situation get out of hand.
 Generally, if your ISP is up front and responsible about killing
 abuser's accounts from his IPs, he won't have any problem, and
 consequently neither will you for using his services.
 
  I would gladly help to educate the people I do get reject messages 
  from, but what exactly do I tell them?
 
 Spamcop.net!  When you report spam, they analyze it to death, and mail
 you back a URL you can go to to see the result.  That URL could be
 mailed to them if they need convincing.  btw, Spamcop reporter IDs are
 free.
 
   Spammers are forging From: addresses, have been for at least a year,
  
  This message comes to you with a forged From: address courtesy of the 
  rewrite rules in /etc/exim/exim.conf.  Excuse me, there was a knock 
  on the door.  Must be Spamcop...
 
 Munging email addresses isn't illegal.  It's just counter-productive.
 How are you going to kill them if they can't find you?!?  :-)
 
 
 -- 
 Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
 (*)http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling  Please don't Cc: me.
 - -
 
 
 -- 
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-- 
David Jardine

Running Debian GNU/Linux and
loving every minute of it.  -L. von Sacher-M.(1835-1895)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[michael]

On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 13:23 +0200, Dennis Stosberg wrote:
 Am Freitag, 13. Mai 2005 12:20 schrieb Nacho:
 
  So I think it's very easy for anybody to automatically extract
  all of the email addresses from the web archive.
 
 It _is_ very easy and many spammers do that.
 
 Your best option probably is to use a second email address for 
 mailing lists only.  
 
 I use [EMAIL PROTECTED] to subscribe to this list (and others), 
 and I have a procmail-based filter on my mail server, which 
 filters out all mails not coming over one of the mailing lists.  
 Most mailing lists insert a X-Mailing-List: header into the 
 mails, which makes filtering very easy.

but isn't much of the spam going to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (as opposed to you
directly)? that's what bothers me a bit...


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[s. keeling]

Incoming from michael:
 On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 13:23 +0200, Dennis Stosberg wrote:
  Am Freitag, 13. Mai 2005 12:20 schrieb Nacho:
  
   So I think it's very easy for anybody to automatically extract
   all of the email addresses from the web archive.
  
  It _is_ very easy and many spammers do that.
 
 but isn't much of the spam going to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (as opposed to you
 directly)? that's what bothers me a bit...

It's going to debian-user@lists.debian.org, and once any subscriber
to that list who reports spam sees it, Spammy's account(s)[*] are in
mail-abuse heaven.  It's a feature.

Running away from spammers (munging your email address,  etc.)
doesn't stop them.  The only thing that might is making it all as
inconvenient as possible to stay in the racket.  Force them to run
around recreating infrastructure every time they use it, and maybe
they'll get a clue.

Get an account at Spamcop.net and LART some yourself.


[*] Excepting APNIC IP's, of course.  Those you can safely /dev/null
at the earliest opportunity.  If I saw any evidence of APNIC ISPs
killing abusers' accounts, I'd care about them too.  I haven't, so
I don't.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling  Please don't Cc: me.
- -


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[David Jardine]

On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 03:54:15PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
 Incoming from michael:
  On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 13:23 +0200, Dennis Stosberg wrote:
   Am Freitag, 13. Mai 2005 12:20 schrieb Nacho:
   
So I think it's very easy for anybody to automatically extract
all of the email addresses from the web archive.
   
   It _is_ very easy and many spammers do that.
  
  but isn't much of the spam going to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (as opposed to you
  directly)? that's what bothers me a bit...
 
 It's going to debian-user@lists.debian.org, and once any subscriber
 to that list who reports spam sees it, Spammy's account(s)[*] are in
 mail-abuse heaven.  It's a feature.
 
 Running away from spammers (munging your email address,  etc.)
 doesn't stop them.  The only thing that might is making it all as
 inconvenient as possible to stay in the racket.  Force them to run
 around recreating infrastructure every time they use it, and maybe
 they'll get a clue.
 
 Get an account at Spamcop.net and LART some yourself.
 
 
 [*] Excepting APNIC IP's, of course.  Those you can safely /dev/null
 at the earliest opportunity.  If I saw any evidence of APNIC ISPs
 killing abusers' accounts, I'd care about them too.  I haven't, so
 I don't.
 

What worries me is the spam that is sent out under my name.  Just 
recently I've had a few messages to the address I'm using now from 
what seemed to be genuine addresses (universities, often) listing a 
dozen or two unknown users they couldn't deliver to.  The 
undeliverable message was some piece of German pollitical spam 
(pretty nasty from the titles although I haven't actually read any).

Am I going to get blacklisted when people report this to Spamcop or 
take other anti-spam measures?  Can I do anything about it?

Cheers,
David


-- 
David Jardine

Running Debian GNU/Linux and
loving every minute of it.  -L. von Sacher-M.(1835-1895)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[s. keeling]

Incoming from David Jardine:
 
 What worries me is the spam that is sent out under my name.  Just 

I get bounces from clueless mail admins all the time.  If they'd spend
two seconds scanning the original's Received: headers, they'd know I
had nothing to do with it.  Blast it back to those fools and tell them
to read email headers, and turn off their idiotic mail-bot until they
do (if at all).

Spammers are forging From: addresses, have been for at least a year,
and anyone who looks at mail headers can see whether it's been done.
Spamcop isn't fooled by moronic tricks like this.  It drills down and
finds the real culprit.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling  Please don't Cc: me.
- -


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[Nick Price]

On 5/23/05, s. keeling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Incoming from David Jardine:
 
  What worries me is the spam that is sent out under my name.  Just
 
 I get bounces from clueless mail admins all the time.  If they'd spend
 two seconds scanning the original's Received: headers, they'd know I
 had nothing to do with it.  Blast it back to those fools and tell them
 to read email headers, and turn off their idiotic mail-bot until they
 do (if at all).
 
 Spammers are forging From: addresses, have been for at least a year,
 and anyone who looks at mail headers can see whether it's been done.
 Spamcop isn't fooled by moronic tricks like this.  It drills down and
 finds the real culprit.
 
 
 --
 Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
 (*)http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling  Please don't Cc: me.
 - -
 
 
 --
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
Part of the problem is that this list is also a widespread public usenet group,
and many spammers harvest e-mails from them as well as post spam to
the group itself.

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[s. keeling]

Incoming from Nick Price:
 
 Part of the problem is that this list is also a widespread public usenet 
 group,
 and many spammers harvest e-mails from them as well as post spam to
 the group itself.

And some of us harvest spammers simply by posting to Usenet.  How are
you going to get the chance to kill them if they can't find you to
spam you?

:-)

Viruses scrape Usenet for victims (Swen).  Others scrape Windows
users' mailboxes and address books.  Send a mail to a Windows user,
and your precious, munged email address is public knowledge.

I say, count on that!  Use it against them.  Kill them when they use
it, and kill them again when they get their new account.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling  Please don't Cc: me.
- -


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[Josh Rehman]

The ubiquity of spam has been ironically liberating - I no longer make
any attempt to hide my email address. I rely on spam filtering and
enjoy openness.

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[Larry Felton Johnson]

My own approach to spam has been to get very quick with the delete
key, and to have a lot of fun with the more bizarre or congenitally
stupid spam.  I've done a moderate amount of 419 baiting (as Waldo
Bundersnuff, ferret rancher, or Louis Napoleon rightful heir to the
Empire of France, or Gomer Pilsbury, Labradoran mango planter), and 
keep the folks in my work group 
amused with a Spam of the Week posting, often involving the stream
of conciousness devices used to block spam filters (yeah, like I'm really
anxious to get into a financial arrangement with someone who spells
mortgage morrtggage).

In general it's a fact of life, like mosquitos and Reality TV, and
I figure if it's my worst problem my life is near perfect.

Larry


On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 06:47:23PM -0700, Josh Rehman wrote:
 The ubiquity of spam has been ironically liberating - I no longer make any 
 attempt to hide my email address. I rely on spam filtering and enjoy 
 openness.

-- 
===
No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up.

-- Lily Tomlin
===


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[David Jardine]

On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 04:43:43PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
 Incoming from David Jardine:
  
  What worries me is the spam that is sent out under my name.  Just 
 
 I get bounces from clueless mail admins all the time.  If they'd spend
 two seconds scanning the original's Received: headers, they'd know I
 had nothing to do with it.  Blast it back to those fools and tell them
 to read email headers, and turn off their idiotic mail-bot until they
 do (if at all).

The messages I've been receiving (was receiving - I haven't had any 
today - perhaps they're using your address now) were polite 
(automated, I imagine) statements of inabilty to deliver the message 
- no accusations of spamming.  There must be masses of email flying 
around all the time with mis-typed addresses; isn't the appropriate 
response to return it to the apparent sender?  That's a real question, 
not a rhetorical one.

The worry I had was about the reject messages I didn't get.  If the 
Peoria Inter-Denominational College of Neo-Tibetan Goldfish Juggling 
received thirty of my dollops of spam, who else was getting them and 
was I being put on blacklists by, well, clueless mail admins and 
fools with idiotic mail-bots?

I would gladly help to educate the people I do get reject messages 
from, but what exactly do I tell them?


 Spammers are forging From: addresses, have been for at least a year,
 and anyone who looks at mail headers can see whether it's been done.
 Spamcop isn't fooled by moronic tricks like this.  It drills down and
 finds the real culprit.

This message comes to you with a forged From: address courtesy of the 
rewrite rules in /etc/exim/exim.conf.  Excuse me, there was a knock 
on the door.  Must be Spamcop...

If you don't get a message then you'll know I'm in jail.
David 

-- 
David Jardine

Running Debian GNU/Linux and
loving every minute of it.  -L. von Sacher-M.(1835-1895)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[s. keeling]

Incoming from Larry Felton Johnson:
 keep the folks in my work group 
 amused with a Spam of the Week posting, often involving the stream

I recently stumbled across a thread on my local user group list where
victims were holding dick wars over the highest SA scores they've
seen (mine's bigger than yours!).  That's a bit too deep for me.  I
just like to see their throats ripped out with sufficient violence
that pretty patterns of blood spatter decorate their walls (figuratively
speaking :-)


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling  Please don't Cc: me.
- -


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[s. keeling]

Incoming from David Jardine:
 On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 04:43:43PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
  Incoming from David Jardine:
   
   What worries me is the spam that is sent out under my name.  Just 
  
  I get bounces from clueless mail admins all the time.  If they'd spend
  two seconds scanning the original's Received: headers, they'd know I
  had nothing to do with it.  Blast it back to those fools and tell them
 
 The messages I've been receiving (was receiving - I haven't had any 
 today - perhaps they're using your address now) were polite 
 (automated, I imagine) statements of inabilty to deliver the message 

Those are the ones I was talking about.  no such user or account
not found or some such.

 - no accusations of spamming.  There must be masses of email flying 

It was me assuming it was a spammer with an old address list.  An
email sent to fifty bad email addresses at AOHell using my From:
doesn't sound like a legitimate, well maintained, opt-in mailing list.
It sounds like a spammer forging my From: address.

 around all the time with mis-typed addresses; isn't the appropriate 
 response to return it to the apparent sender?  That's a real question, 
 not a rhetorical one.

Once, it was.  Now, 65% - 80% of network traffic is spam or malware.
Now, it's smarter to assume that if you sent Joe an email and don't
hear back within a couple of days, either Joe's on holidays or his
spam filter is set too tight, so you should send him another one or
call him.  Sending something that instead looks (to your average
Windows user) like a MTA error message is a waste of time, effort,
and bandwidth.

 The worry I had was about the reject messages I didn't get.  If the 
 Peoria Inter-Denominational College of Neo-Tibetan Goldfish Juggling 
 received thirty of my dollops of spam, who else was getting them and 
 was I being put on blacklists by, well, clueless mail admins and 
 fools with idiotic mail-bots?

The clueless might report you, but those who actually manage said
lists aren't that dumb.  There needs to be some pretty damning
evidence that's provably from you to hurt you.  Alternatively, your
ISP could be so clueless as to let the situation get out of hand.
Generally, if your ISP is up front and responsible about killing
abuser's accounts from his IPs, he won't have any problem, and
consequently neither will you for using his services.

 I would gladly help to educate the people I do get reject messages 
 from, but what exactly do I tell them?

Spamcop.net!  When you report spam, they analyze it to death, and mail
you back a URL you can go to to see the result.  That URL could be
mailed to them if they need convincing.  btw, Spamcop reporter IDs are
free.

  Spammers are forging From: addresses, have been for at least a year,
 
 This message comes to you with a forged From: address courtesy of the 
 rewrite rules in /etc/exim/exim.conf.  Excuse me, there was a knock 
 on the door.  Must be Spamcop...

Munging email addresses isn't illegal.  It's just counter-productive.
How are you going to kill them if they can't find you?!?  :-)


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling  Please don't Cc: me.
- -


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[Nacho]

On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 07:45:41AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
 
 Not that munging helps in the least.  
 http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful

Interesting link, thanks for it.

  I have spam filters and so, and also my email address for this list
  is just for this and for nothing more, I have set up a SPF record
  in DNS for my domain... but well, I think it would be better if
  email addresses were not directly listed in the archive...
 
 So you want the spammers to win while you cower in fear?
 
 Report spam instead.  Just hitting delete does nothing to solve the 
 problem.

Believe me, I've reported spam many times, most of the times the ISP just
didn't care about it; my experience is that ISPs worried about spam take the
measures they need so it never happens with their servers, so most spammers
use servers which they know that are spam friendly.

Sure that hitting delete does nothing to solve the problem, but I'm afraid
there is not a full solution now...

It's very easy to have a spammer server listed in DDBB such as spamcop, I
think this is a good thing, but also causes lots of troubles to many people
who used the blocked server.

Sincerely, I don't have many hopes for a good solution for spam... I'm
afraid it will be used as a excuse to justify freedom decreases in the use of
email on the Internet. I can't believe that people who send those stupid spam
messages really earn money...

Anyway, I will try not to cower in fear ;-)

Best regards:

Nacho

-- 
No book comes out of a vacuum (G. Buehler)
http://www.lascartasdelavida.com


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[Nacho]

Hi,

I've noticed that the email addresses in the archive of this list are not
hidden, I mean that in other archives of other lists if you want to see the
real email address of somebody you have to give your mail to receive it, or
simply you can send a message to him/her from the web...

So I think it's very easy for anybody to automatically extract all of the
email addresses from the web archive.

I have spam filters and so, and also my email address for this list is just
for this and for nothing more, I have set up a SPF record in DNS for my 
domain... but well, I think it would be better if email addresses were not
directly listed in the archive...

So I was wondering if you have a trick for this, like for example a majordomo
command that hides your email in the archive or something similar, I
understand that if I put a false email to cheat the spammers (such as
[EMAIL PROTECTED]) in the From fields of the messages I send to
this list then they will be rejected...

Thanks for your help:

Nacho

-- 
No book comes out of a vacuum (G. Buehler)
http://www.lascartasdelavida.com


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[Dennis Stosberg]

Am Freitag, 13. Mai 2005 12:20 schrieb Nacho:

 So I think it's very easy for anybody to automatically extract
 all of the email addresses from the web archive.

It _is_ very easy and many spammers do that.

Your best option probably is to use a second email address for 
mailing lists only.  

I use [EMAIL PROTECTED] to subscribe to this list (and others), 
and I have a procmail-based filter on my mail server, which 
filters out all mails not coming over one of the mailing lists.  
Most mailing lists insert a X-Mailing-List: header into the 
mails, which makes filtering very easy.


Regards,
Dennis

-- 
Send personal mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] only.  Off-list 
mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED] will not reach me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?

[Paul Johnson]

On Friday May 13 2005 3:20 am, Nacho wrote:
 Hi,

 I've noticed that the email addresses in the archive of this list
 are not hidden, I mean that in other archives of other lists if you
 want to see the real email address of somebody you have to give
 your mail to receive it, or simply you can send a message to
 him/her from the web...

 So I think it's very easy for anybody to automatically extract all
 of the email addresses from the web archive.

Not that munging helps in the least.  
http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful

 I have spam filters and so, and also my email address for this list
 is just for this and for nothing more, I have set up a SPF record
 in DNS for my domain... but well, I think it would be better if
 email addresses were not directly listed in the archive...

So you want the spammers to win while you cower in fear?

 So I was wondering if you have a trick for this, like for example a
 majordomo command that hides your email in the archive or something
 similar, I understand that if I put a false email to cheat the
 spammers (such as [EMAIL PROTECTED]) in the From
 fields of the messages I send to this list then they will be
 rejected...

Report spam instead.  Just hitting delete does nothing to solve the 
problem.

-- 
Paul Johnson
Email and Instant Messenger (Jabber): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://ursine.ca/~baloo/


pgpRw1mhSsAXq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: How to report spam (was Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?)

[Paul Johnson]

On Friday May 13 2005 9:50 am, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
  Report spam instead.  Just hitting delete does nothing to solve
  the problem.

 Could you explain how you would do that?

 Is it a lengthy process or just hitting a key or forwarding the
 spam email to another address?

Depends on how you do it.  You can learn how to sort through the 
headers on your own, or you can cheat and use http://www.spamcop.net/ 
to automate the process.

 How can I be sure that reporting spam indeed works?

Experience.  That part isn't something that can be taught.

 Is there any authority who monitors this list? 

Yeah, the listmasters, but go see http://lists.debian.org/...opennness 
is a policy of Debian.

-- 
Paul Johnson
Email and Instant Messenger (Jabber): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://ursine.ca/~baloo/


pgpTdWJpq5lzZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: How to report spam (was Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?)

[s. keeling]

Incoming from Paul Johnson:
 On Friday May 13 2005 9:50 am, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
   Report spam instead.  Just hitting delete does nothing to solve
   the problem.
 
  Could you explain how you would do that?
  How can I be sure that reporting spam indeed works?
 
 Experience.  That part isn't something that can be taught.

It all relies on the supposition that you can trust ISPs to not ignore
abuse.  For the others, you toss this into your ~/.procmailrc, which
simply /dev/nulls everything from the worst, and most indifferent
towards abuse originating with them.  Ostracise them:

# ---
# kornet.net, bora.net, hanaro, chinanet, ...
# easynet
#
APNIC= (58|59|60|61|124|125|126|202|203|210|211|218|219|220|221|222)
ALL256   = [0-9][0-9]?[0-9]?
EASYNET  = 195\\.40
:0
* -2^0
* ! (^TO_|^From.*)(debian|flex.?b|unites|e.?rider|chkrootkit)
* $ ^Received:.*(\\${APNIC}\\.${ALL256}\\.${ALL256}\\.${ALL256}\\\
  |\\${EASYNET}\\.${ALL256}\\.${ALL256}\\\
)
{
  LOG=(ap|kr|jp|en)nic IP - 
  :0
  /dev/null
}


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling  Please don't Cc: me.
- -


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Posting to Debian lists without getting mail

[Andrew Malcolmson]

I often want to ask a question on a non-public Debian list but I don't 
follow the list actively so I don't really want to continually get the 
lists' mail.

Mailman lets you turn on or off mail delivery but Debian's SmartList 
doesn't.

What can I do?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Posting to Debian lists without getting mail

[s. keeling]

Incoming from Andrew Malcolmson:
 I often want to ask a question on a non-public Debian list but I don't 
 follow the list actively so I don't really want to continually get the 
 lists' mail.
 
 Mailman lets you turn on or off mail delivery but Debian's SmartList 
 doesn't.
 
 What can I do?

Ask, then follow it at lists.debian.org


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)   http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling 
- -


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Posting to Debian lists without getting mail

[Kevin Mark]

On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 09:29:25AM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
 Incoming from Andrew Malcolmson:
  I often want to ask a question on a non-public Debian list but I don't 
  follow the list actively so I don't really want to continually get the 
  lists' mail.
  
  Mailman lets you turn on or off mail delivery but Debian's SmartList 
  doesn't.
  
  What can I do?
 
 Ask, then follow it at lists.debian.org
Hi Andy,
IIRC most debian lists do not require you to 'join' the list to post. (a
mixed blessing). And some folks use a newsreader thingy like gmame
(sp?). to follow their reply or just read the list.
-Kev
-- 

(__)
(oo)
  /--\/
 / |||
*  /\---/\
   ~~   ~~
Have you mooed today?...


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Posting to Debian lists without getting mail

[Paul Gear]

Kevin Mark wrote:
 ...
 Hi Andy,
 IIRC most debian lists do not require you to 'join' the list to post. (a
 mixed blessing). And some folks use a newsreader thingy like gmame
 (sp?). to follow their reply or just read the list.

Point your news reader to news.gmane.org - fantastic for reading lists
like this.  It handles subscribing you as well.  I only read this list
through gmane because it is so much easier.
-- 
Paul
http://paulgear.webhop.net
--
If at first you *do* succeed, carefully check your success metrics for
accuracy.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Symantec AntiVirus Scans debian lists?

[Antonio Rodriguez]

I have noticed that in all the messages the following header appears:
X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
Does it mean that the debian list headquarters is using Symantec for
virus scanning, or it is done somewhere down the line?
If the Debian Group is doing it, isnt it ironic somewhat? I am trying
to understand. 


-- 

==
||
|\|||/   |
|   ( * * )Saludos de|
|\  / Antonio Rodríguez |
|   [  ^  ]  |
|  /   ^   \ |
| || :   : ||  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |
||
==


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Symantec AntiVirus Scans debian lists?

[Florian Ernst]

Hello Antonio!

On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 06:21:04AM -0400, Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
 I have noticed that in all the messages the following header appears:
 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
 Does it mean that the debian list headquarters is using Symantec for
 virus scanning, or it is done somewhere down the line?

Scanning the last ten days:
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ for file in `rgrep -l X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec \
|AntiVirus Scan Engine .mail/debian-user/*`; do grep ^From: $file; \
|done | sort -u
|From: Andy Firman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|From: Antonio Rodriguez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|From: Derrick 'dman' Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|From: Michael Satterwhite [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ 

So I'd guess it's somewhere down your line :)

 If the Debian Group is doing it, isnt it ironic somewhat? I am trying
 to understand. 

True, that would be quite ironic... ;)

HTH,
Flo


PS: Honoring your Mail-Followup-To...


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Symantec AntiVirus Scans debian lists?

[Antonio Rodriguez]

On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 12:37:31PM +0200, Florian Ernst wrote:
 Hello Antonio!
 
 On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 06:21:04AM -0400, Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
  I have noticed that in all the messages the following header appears:
  X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
  Does it mean that the debian list headquarters is using Symantec for
  virus scanning, or it is done somewhere down the line?
 
 Scanning the last ten days:
 |[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ for file in `rgrep -l X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec \
 |AntiVirus Scan Engine .mail/debian-user/*`; do grep ^From: $file; \
 |done | sort -u
 |From: Andy Firman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |From: Antonio Rodriguez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |From: Derrick 'dman' Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |From: Michael Satterwhite [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ 
 
 So I'd guess it's somewhere down your line :)
 

Beautiful, it then means it is road runner who is scanning. Perfect.
Thank you Florian.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Symantec AntiVirus Scans debian lists?

[DGLU TR]

On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 12:37:31PM +0200, Florian Ernst wrote:
 Hello Antonio!
 

 PS: Honoring your Mail-Followup-To...

Im trying to fix this problem. I just wrote `set followup_to=no´
in my .muttrc. I am missreading the manual pages for muttrc?
It says there that it is set to yes by default, so obviously I have to
invert it. Or it is not the setting to be changed?
thank you 4 ur help.


-- 

==
||
|\|||/   |
|   ( * * )Saludos de|
|\  / Antonio Rodríguez |
|   [  ^  ]  |
|  /   ^   \ |
| || :   : ||  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |
||
==


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Symantec AntiVirus Scans debian lists?

[Florian Ernst]

Hello again!

On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 07:29:07AM -0400, DGLU TR wrote:
 On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 12:37:31PM +0200, Florian Ernst wrote:
  PS: Honoring your Mail-Followup-To...
 
 Im trying to fix this problem. I just wrote `set followup_to=no?
 in my .muttrc. I am missreading the manual pages for muttrc?
 It says there that it is set to yes by default, so obviously I have to
 invert it. Or it is not the setting to be changed?
 thank you 4 ur help.

Perhaps looking at
http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/manual-4.html#ss4.8
will provide further insight into the process on mailing lists...

This option followup_to is not set in my .muttrc so I just get the
default, but I have debian-user listed in lists and subscribe.

HTH,
Flo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

debian lists have no nomail option

[Dan Jacobson]

I was surprised to find that some debian lists require a subscription
to post, but have no nomail option.

This means e.g. gmane.org users will get a copy of each message, even
though they've already read them.

For modem users, for the privilege of posting one message, one must
get one's POP box buried with extra copies of messages one normally
reads elsewhere.

 D == Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

D This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
D #206959: lists.debian.org: no options control information,

D Dan Jacobson wrote:
 Package: lists.debian.org
 Version: unavailable; reported 2003-08-24
 Severity: normal
 
 Gentlemen, I subscribed to a list and was surprised that the user is
 told no way how to control the list options.  Not in the welcome

D Since there are none.  Thanks.

OK, then mention that there, else we would have never imagined it.

D Regards,

D  Joey


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: debian lists have no nomail option

[Travis Crump]

Dan Jacobson wrote:
I was surprised to find that some debian lists require a subscription
to post, but have no nomail option.
Umm, which debian lists require a subscription in order to post?



pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: debian lists have no nomail option

[Travis Crump]

Travis Crump wrote:
Dan Jacobson wrote:

I was surprised to find that some debian lists require a subscription
to post, but have no nomail option.
Umm, which debian lists require a subscription in order to post?

never mind, I figured it out(some==2, debian-chinese-(big5|gb) and 
debian-ctte, both of which are very low volume lists[debian-chinese has 
about one post every other day, debian-ctte has about one thread since 
it went to members-only posting]).


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#206959: debian lists have no nomail option

[Josip Rodin]

On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 07:17:47AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
 This means e.g. gmane.org users will get a copy of each message, even
 though they've already read them.

No, it doesn't. Try thinking about what it means when the web page says
This list is not moderated, posting is allowed to anyone..

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

gnus: reading debian lists by NNTP want to reply by mail

[Dan Jacobson]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gnu.emacs.gnus as well.

In gnus Info it says:
`gnus-mailing-list-groups'
 If your news server offers groups that are really mailing lists
 gatewayed to the NNTP server, you can read those groups without
 problems, but you can't post/followup to them without some
 difficulty.  One solution is to add a `to-address' to the group
 parameters (*note Group Parameters::).  An easier thing to do is
 set the `gnus-mailing-list-groups' to a regexp that matches the
 groups that really are mailing lists.  Then, at least, followups
 to the mailing lists will work most of the time.  Posting to these
 groups (`a') is still a pain, though.

1. what is the (`a') all about?  Oh, I see, when one hits a.
2. so I set gnus-mailing-list-groups to match and now it just replies to the 
sender.
3. OK, So, I must go, for each debian group I'm subscribed to, into
the special group parameters editor, and make them by hand into their
mailing list addresses.  Then I suppose I also have to go into the
group parameters and set how I want my From address to look, as I
prefer a different From address when I reply to a mail group
vs. replying to one person.  I must do this over and over by hand for
each debian group.

$ noffle -l|grep debian
gmane.linux.debian.user news.gmane.org over
linux.debian.user news.sinica.edu.tw full
linux.debian.user.chinese.big5 news.sinica.edu.tw full ...

I suppose all my sed skill are for naught and I can save my
$ noffle -l|sed -n '/^linux\./{;s/^linux\.//;s/ 
.*//;s/\./-/g;s/$/@lists.debian.org/p;}'
debian-user@lists.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ...
for mom.

No, I don't suppose there is a way for me, when in a group that
matches /^linux/ or /^gmane/ to do my various regexp substitution
schemes that come up with the correct mailing address of the group, so
that when I hit a or f or F it does the right thing.

Another approach is for me to use my above regexp to generate a whole
group parameters blob for many groups that I could somehow paste into
my .newsrc.eld ... yuck.

Anyways, why with the million features do I always need to use the
ones that aren't there.
-- 
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Procmail Rules for Debian lists

[Matijs van Zuijlen]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:59:16PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
 on Tue, Apr 09, 2002, Matijs van Zuijlen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 03:50:54AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
   :0:
   * ^X-Mailing-List: \/[^@]+
   $LISTDIR/$MATCH/
  
  As has been noted[1] in another thread on the same subject on
  debian-devel: this is dangerous. Someone could just send an email with
  
  X-Mailing-List: ../something
  
  in its headers to overwrite your file ~/something (and try other
  variations if that didn't work).
  
  [1] See:
  http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200202/msg02132.html
 
 Good point.  I was concerned about that...
 
 Since it's matching on X-foo headers, it doens't have to pass RFC
 822/2822 rules either.
 
 What's a good regexp that will catch characters up to the '@' then?
 
 * ^X-BeenThere: \/[^.@]+
 
 ...will at least prevent the parent directory trick.  Is there a good
 washer for something like this that can be put into procmail?

The message I refered to suggests:

:0:
* ^X-Mailing-List:.*debian-\/[-a-zA-Z0-9]*
debian/${MATCH}

for debian lists, so I would think something like:

* ^X-BeenThere: \/[-a-zA-Z0-9]+

would work for most mailing lists. Otherwise, their names would be
really weird. Whether this is a good option depends on what you want to
happen if any other characters appear before the @. IIRC I saw someone
put to *-lines in a row. Maybe something along the lines of:

* ^X-BeenThere: [-a-zA-Z0-9]+@
* ^X-BeenThere: \/[-a-zA-Z0-9]+

would work? But maybe someone with more procmail knowledge should
comment on this.

-- 
Note that I use Debian version 3.0
Linux mus 2.4.17mvz4 #1 Fri Mar 15 23:30:15 CET 2002 i686 unknown

Matijs van Zuijlen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Procmail Rules for Debian lists

[Harry Putnam]

Paul Sargent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Hi People,

 I'm getting quite a lot of messages dropping through my procmail rules for
 debian lists. I was wondering if anyone here had a good setup.

 The problem seems to be that not all mails from this list get tagged with
 X-Mailing-List which is what I'm checking on.

 This is my current rule:

 :0:
 * ^X-Mailing-List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 * ^X-Mailing-List: debian-\/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 $DEBIAN/$MATCH

 Any advances?

Is the X-Loop header any more consistent?



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Procmail Rules for Debian lists

[Robert Waldner]

On Tue, 09 Apr 2002 01:46:14 PDT, Harry Putnam writes:
 I'm getting quite a lot of messages dropping through my procmail rules for
 debian lists. I was wondering if anyone here had a good setup.

 The problem seems to be that not all mails from this list get tagged with
 X-Mailing-List which is what I'm checking on.

Hmm, have you tried procmails TO-macro?

cheers,
rw
-- 
/ Ing. Robert Waldner | Security Engineer |  CoreTec IT-Security  \
\   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   | T +43 1 503 72 73 | F +43 1 503 72 73 x99 /




pgp7ZuBqaXDgt.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Procmail Rules for Debian lists

[Paul Sargent]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:33:57PM -0500, dman wrote:

 All messages which are delivered by the list software do have that
 header (unless something is really broken there).  Were the missed
 messages Cc'ed to you?

Nope, here's an example of one of the 5 or 6 that missed my rule last night.

From kmself@ix.netcom.com Mon Apr 08 20:39:59 2002
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] ident=pauls)
by .3dlabs.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 16uezf-0005eY-00
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 20:39:59 +0100
Received: from @@@.3dlabs.com [193.128.216.85]
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.6)
for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (single-drop);
Mon, 08 Apr 2002 20:39:59 +0100 (BST)
Received: from uisge.3dlabs.com ([193.128.216.104]) by @.3dlabs.com
with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13)
id G0S56PHY; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 20:44:13 +0100
Received: from murphy.debian.org (murphy.debian.org [65.125.64.134])
by uisge.3dlabs.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA26878
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 20:39:39 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 6356 invoked by uid 38); 8 Apr 2002 17:19:54 -  
Received: (qmail 5839 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2002 17:19:27 -
Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (207.69.200.226)
  by murphy.debian.org with SMTP; 8 Apr 2002 17:19:27 -
  Received: from dialup-63.208.130.252.dial1.sanfrancisco1.level3.net
([63.208.130.252] helo=localhost)
by blount.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
id 16ucnE-0007Q3-00
for debian-user@lists.debian.org; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 13:19:01 -0400
Received: from karsten by localhost with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 16ucnC-0007bq-00
for debian-user@lists.debian.org; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 10:18:58 -0700
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com
To: Debian User List debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Building a single user Internet terminal / Done!
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:18:58 +0100 
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
List-Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
List-Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=iso-8859-1


No X-Mailing-List anywhere.

-- 
Paul Sargent
Tel: +44 (1784) 476669
Fax: +44 (1784) 470699
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Procmail Rules for Debian lists

[Karsten M. Self]

on Mon, Apr 08, 2002, Paul Sargent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 Hi People,
 
 I'm getting quite a lot of messages dropping through my procmail rules for
 debian lists. I was wondering if anyone here had a good setup.
 
 The problem seems to be that not all mails from this list get tagged with
 X-Mailing-List which is what I'm checking on.
 
 This is my current rule:
 
 :0:
 * ^X-Mailing-List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 * ^X-Mailing-List: debian-\/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 $DEBIAN/$MATCH
 
 Any advances?

I run the following, from Nick Moffitt, on my laptop, which has been
sitting in as my primary system for the past couple of months.

This is actually an exerpt of my list processing rules.  It sits
underneath the annoying LookOut tnef crap filter and the 'you meant to
send your unsubscribe request elsewhere' autoresponder, and above a
couple of rules to pick up lists running on dog poor software that
doesn't latch these hooks.

This mostly works, but does occasionally surprise me with new
directories.  Mailman subscription notices are particularly good at
doing that.

# --
# Mailing list rules (Filched from Nick Moffitt)

:0:
* ^Sender: owner-\/[^@]+
$LISTDIR/$MATCH/

:0:
* ^X-BeenThere: \/[^@]+
$LISTDIR/$MATCH/

:0:
* ^Delivered-To: mailing list \/[^@]+
$LISTDIR/$MATCH/

:0:
* ^X-Mailing-List: \/[^@]+
$LISTDIR/$MATCH/

:0:
* ^X-Loop: \/[^@]+
$LISTDIR/$MATCH/

:0:
* ^List-Id: \/[^@]+
$LISTDIR/$MATCH/

# --

Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com   http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
   NPR:  Radio for between the ears:  http://www.npr.org/


pgpwVI5DxLBF2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Procmail Rules for Debian lists

[Karsten M. Self]

on Tue, Apr 09, 2002, Paul Sargent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:33:57PM -0500, dman wrote:
 
  All messages which are delivered by the list software do have that
  header (unless something is really broken there).  Were the missed
  messages Cc'ed to you?
 
 Nope, here's an example of one of the 5 or 6 that missed my rule last night.
 
 From kmself@ix.netcom.com Mon Apr 08 20:39:59 2002
 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] ident=pauls)
 by .3dlabs.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
 id 16uezf-0005eY-00
 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 20:39:59 +0100
 Received: from @@@.3dlabs.com [193.128.216.85]
 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.6)
 for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (single-drop);
 Mon, 08 Apr 2002 20:39:59 +0100 (BST)
 Received: from uisge.3dlabs.com ([193.128.216.104]) by @.3dlabs.com
 with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13)
 id G0S56PHY; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 20:44:13 +0100
   Received: from murphy.debian.org (murphy.debian.org [65.125.64.134])
 by uisge.3dlabs.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA26878
 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 20:39:39 +0100 (BST)
 Received: (qmail 6356 invoked by uid 38); 8 Apr 2002 17:19:54 -  
 Received: (qmail 5839 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2002 17:19:27 -
 Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (207.69.200.226)
   by murphy.debian.org with SMTP; 8 Apr 2002 17:19:27 -
   Received: from dialup-63.208.130.252.dial1.sanfrancisco1.level3.net
 ([63.208.130.252] helo=localhost)
 by blount.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
 id 16ucnE-0007Q3-00
 for debian-user@lists.debian.org; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 13:19:01 -0400
 Received: from karsten by localhost with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
 id 16ucnC-0007bq-00
 for debian-user@lists.debian.org; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 10:18:58 -0700
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 From: Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com
 To: Debian User List debian-user@lists.debian.org
 Subject: Re: Building a single user Internet terminal / Done!
 Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:18:58 +0100 
 MIME-Version: 1.0
 List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 List-Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 List-Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=iso-8859-1
 
 
 No X-Mailing-List anywhere.

Hah!  My Anti-X-Mailing-List header eater works!

-- 
Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com   http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
   Data corrupts.  Absolute data corrupts absolutely.
-- Ed Self's corollary of Atkinson's Law.

...Ok, it's eight days late, but that's pretty early for me to be over
deadline...


pgpdJ3B9ftvXz.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Procmail Rules for Debian lists

[Paul Sargent]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 04:14:07PM -0500, Dave Sherohman wrote:
 Maybe you
 just need to modify the regexes you're matching against
 X-Mailing-List to be a little less demanding, although I would expect
 that header to be set identically on every message...

Yeah, so would I, I'm wondering if something is stripping them out on the
way to me. After all I am sitting behind an Exchange server.

Paul
-- 
Paul Sargent
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]