Hi
I have a wating meassge, but the cue is empty.
How can I get off this waring?
The xxx are repace to hide (spam) the real neames
=Waring message everyday=
The [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list has 1 request(s) waiting for your
consideration at:
Jim == Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Oh, if you prefer windstorms, hurricane is a bad analogy. Far
more accurate is tornado.0.1 wink
Jim Hurricane is the most accurate analogy, because with
Jim hurricanes nobody knows about them
Jim == Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim Hi all, I've been looking into TMDA (http://tmda.net) and got
Jim to wondering if something like this (or a subset of it)
Jim should be incorporated into Mailman.
There was a thread about this in the fairly recent past, perhaps it
At 1:28 AM +0900 2006-01-30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
There was a thread about this in the fairly recent past, perhaps it
was on mailman-developers, though. IIRC the consensus was making
this more trouble than it's worth is not going to be easy.
There is a FAQ entry on how to
Peter wrote:
=Waring message everyday=
The [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list has 1 request(s) waiting for your
consideration at:
http://xxx/cgi-bin/mailman/admindb/xxx
Please attend to this at your earliest convenience. This notice of
pending requests, if any, will be
I have been reading throughout the web and it seems that when one is reading
a mailing list in Outlook, Mailman does something like this:
http://www.washington.edu/computing/mailman/faqs/mailman.header.html
Is there a work-around to that yet?
Kind regards,
Jp
Hi,
I have successfully migrated our Mailman to a new server. All seem to
work perfectly on the existing Lists.
However when, I created a new list, somehow emails coming from the
internet are being accepted/relayed and bounced properly but email
coming from my own domain indicates unknown
How hard would it be for someone to maliciously start sending all the users
in my list emails or start deleting people from it by sending bounce errors
or by spoofing the admin email and start emailing everyone on the list?
Is this a common problem, or is mailman secure about it? What are some
Jp Possenti wrote:
I have been reading throughout the web and it seems that when one is reading
a mailing list in Outlook, Mailman does something like this:
http://www.washington.edu/computing/mailman/faqs/mailman.header.html
Is there a work-around to that yet?
See
Neilrey Espino wrote:
I have successfully migrated our Mailman to a new server. All seem to
work perfectly on the existing Lists.
However when, I created a new list, somehow emails coming from the
internet are being accepted/relayed and bounced properly but email
coming from my own domain
Jp Possenti wrote:
How hard would it be for someone to maliciously start sending all the users
in my list emails or start deleting people from it by sending bounce errors
or by spoofing the admin email and start emailing everyone on the list?
It all depends on how your list is set up.
Is this
So basically there is none yet. Hopefully in the future there will be. I
don't want to hack anything really, just don't feel comfortable enough, and
it maybe breaking something else in the long run after an upgrade or update.
Kind regards,
Jp
-Original Message-
From: Mark Sapiro
Why is it that when I set Mailman to apply a footer with some info, Outlook
detects it as an attachment?
Is this yet another problem with just outlook?
Also does the footer in mailman support HTML?
I want to make it so at the bottom of every email I can include a reply to
address for them to
I have a couple of questions regarding that FAQ link:
1. Setting the max_num_recipients to 1 will mean that any time I make a
newsletter to the public, I need to login and approve that request, correct?
I am just confused about the wording of the command. Does that mean that the
message will go
Jp Possenti wrote:
Why is it that when I set Mailman to apply a footer with some info, Outlook
detects it as an attachment?
Is this yet another problem with just outlook?
Also does the footer in mailman support HTML?
Please read the FAQ. A search of the FAQ for footer should turn up the
Mark,
If I decide to do the one that is like this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The command goes in the subject or body?
In this case unsubscribe would be in which? Or does it not matter?
Kind regards,
Jp Possenti
-Original Message-
From: Mark Sapiro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday,
Jp Possenti wrote:
I have a couple of questions regarding that FAQ link:
1. Setting the max_num_recipients to 1 will mean that any time I make a
newsletter to the public, I need to login and approve that request, correct?
Maybe. See below.
I am just confused about the wording of the command.
Jp Possenti wrote:
If I decide to do the one that is like this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The command goes in the subject or body?
In this case unsubscribe would be in which? Or does it not matter?
The '-request' processing processes the Subject: and the first
mm_cfg.DEFAULT_MAIL_COMMANDS_MAX_LINES
Brad Knowles wrote:
At 1:28 AM +0900 2006-01-30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
There was a thread about this in the fairly recent past, perhaps it
was on mailman-developers, though. IIRC the consensus was making
this more trouble than it's worth is not going to be easy.
There is a
Brad Knowles wrote:
At 2:11 PM -0500 2006-01-28, Jim Popovitch wrote:
The whole reason for me waxing so passionately on this thread is the
earlier suggestion that Diana shouldn't have even emailed mailman-users,
but rather mailman-security and kept it quiet thereafter (this after it
was
Jp Possenti wrote:
I have a couple of questions regarding that FAQ link:
1. Setting the max_num_recipients to 1 will mean that any time I make a
newsletter to the public, I need to login and approve that request, correct?
The number of recipients is the number of addresses in the email you
Jp Possenti wrote:
How hard would it be for someone to maliciously start sending all the users
in my list emails or start deleting people from it by sending bounce errors
It's not hard at all. In fact it's quite easy. This is because the raw
archive data is available to the public. See this
So basically what you are saying is that Mailman is very insecure? (in
short)
You say I should not have my admin email as a list member. By that you mean
[EMAIL PROTECTED] which is the default address as the admin?
If so then what am I supposed to create, and why would creating one make a
Jp Possenti wrote:
So basically what you are saying is that Mailman is very insecure? (in
short)
:-)
Honestly, NO. Mailman is much more secure, in deed very secure, than
most software I see.The integrity of Mailman depends highly on the
security of your OS, your MTA and your webserver.
Jim Popovitch wrote:
It's not hard at all. In fact it's quite easy. This is because the raw
archive data is available to the public. See this FAQ:
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showfile=faq04.066.htp
Only if the list has public archives. If there are no archives, there
Jim Popovitch wrote:
You say I should not have my admin email as a list member. By that you mean
[EMAIL PROTECTED] which is the default address as the admin?
Your admin email would be [EMAIL PROTECTED] That address
doesn't belong in the subscribers list, nor does [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To
If I may, Mark -;).
You say I should not have my admin email as a list member. By that you
mean
[EMAIL PROTECTED] which is the default address as the admin?
I don't think that's correct??
If so then what am I supposed to create, and why would creating one make a
difference?
Even tho I only
Hi folks,
Apologies if this is covered in the Mailman docs or the FAQs, but I'm having
problems finding any concrete information.
I've installed Mailman via the FreeBSD ports collection on my FreeBSD server
(running 4.7). My MTA is Exim 4.22, and my web server is Apache 1.3.x.
I currently have
Daniel Spreadbury wrote:
Apologies if this is covered in the Mailman docs or the FAQs, but I'm having
problems finding any concrete information.
Searching the FAQ wizard at
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
for
virtual
will return some relevant information including FAQs
At 1:53 PM -0500 2006-01-29, Jp Possenti wrote:
I have been reading throughout the web and it seems that when one is reading
a mailing list in Outlook, Mailman does something like this:
http://www.washington.edu/computing/mailman/faqs/mailman.header.html
Is there a work-around to that
At 1:56 PM -0500 2006-01-29, Jp Possenti wrote:
How hard would it be for someone to maliciously start sending all the users
in my list emails or start deleting people from it by sending bounce errors
or by spoofing the admin email and start emailing everyone on the list?
It's
At 2:24 PM -0500 2006-01-29, Jp Possenti wrote:
Why is it that when I set Mailman to apply a footer with some info, Outlook
detects it as an attachment?
Is this yet another problem with just outlook?
Outlook and certain other MUAs, yes.
Also does the footer in mailman support
At 4:10 PM -0500 2006-01-29, Jim Popovitch wrote:
But, Diana wasn't emailing sensitive info. She was asking a very
important question about something that was already public. You then
told her that she should have gone to the secret-handshake club. Are
you suggesting that all Hey, has
At 4:31 PM -0500 2006-01-29, Jim Popovitch wrote:
DKIM takes it a step
further and adds an encrypted email header key that is carried with
the email during it's entire journey through multiple servers. This key
enables every hop to validate
At 4:50 PM -0500 2006-01-29, Jp Possenti wrote:
So basically what you are saying is that Mailman is very insecure? (in
short)
No, not Mailman. At least, not Mailman per se. No, *ALL* SMTP
e-mail is inherently insecure -- unless you add stuff to it to make
it secure. HTTP is
If we insist that everyone follow the proper procedure every
time, then we shouldn't have any problems. But if you can't (or
won't) follow the proper procedures, then I think it's perfectly
reasonable to ask that you go somewhere else.
THANK you, Brad!!
I think all Admins/Owners have same
Jim == Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim She was asking a very important question about something that
Jim was already public.
What important question? It's an easy to execute exploit (in fact, it
occasionally happens due to ordinary mail, that's why it was found and
fixed
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Jim == Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim She was asking a very important question about something that
Jim was already public.
What important question?
I quote Diana from her original email that sparked this thread:
The notice suggests all versions
Just realized Mark The other lists are actually fine,,,I'm only
having problems with the newly created list. I'm not sure if there's a
typo on the aliases.
What else could I check ?
Thanks,
Neilrey
-Original Message-
From: Mark Sapiro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday,
Brad Knowles wrote:
If we insist that everyone follow the proper procedure every time,
then we shouldn't have any problems.
Well, I disagree with the current procedure, which based on past emails,
suggests that no one is kept informed about security concerns, and only
those that hear about
Neilrey Espino wrote:
Just realized Mark The other lists are actually fine,,,I'm only
having problems with the newly created list. I'm not sure if there's a
typo on the aliases.
If mail from the internet reaches the list, then it would seem the
aliases would be OK. If not, there might be a
41 matches
Mail list logo
