Re: [Mailman-Users] How to track down someone mislabeling msgs as abuse?

Richard Johnson writes: > I tried this just now, adding "%(user_address)" to the footer, Executive summary: Try adding "s" to the end of that. The format string is "%s", which in very old Pythons needed to be referred to according to its position in the string. More modern Pythons allow you

Re: [Mailman-Users] Migrating Mailman to New Server (Same Domain)

Lindsay Haisley writes: > On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 17:52 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > I wonder if his system might default to a non-GNU tar. > > No, I use GNU tar. Sorry for the confusion. I was thinking the OP might not be using GNU tar. > Sufficient knowle

Re: [Mailman-Users] Migrating Mailman to New Server (Same Domain)

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 6/11/18 4:36 AM, Jeffrey Rolland wrote: > > I tried using your script. The tar_list.sh script works fine. But, for the > > untar_list.sh script, I had two fairly big problems. > > > Where did you find these scripts? They are not distributed by the GNU > mailman

Re: [Mailman-Users] Spam Subscriptions

Mark Dale writes: > D'oh. My apologies. The error was not from the trailing '$' but > from not having the quotes in place originally. All is now well > (with the above). No big deal; on the contrary, we really appreciate your report confirming that the regex works as expected for you, after

Re: [Mailman-Users] Duplicate command results

Mark Sapiro writes: > If you are including the command in both the Subject: and the body, that > is why. If the Subject: contains a valid command, it will be executed. > Thus a message with 'Subject: help' and 'help' in the body contains two > help commands so the command is executed twice.

Re: [Mailman-Users] GDPR

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > > Some of these may be hidden (eg, Reply-To is normally not displayed; > > I don't know offhand if it's in the mbox files). > > Yes, Reply-To: is a standard header and included in mbox files. "The" mbox files refers to what Mailman stores in

Re: [Mailman-Users] analytics tool for mailman?

tlhackque via Mailman-Users writes: > I have no opinion on the wisdom or bases of GitLab's position.  As > mailing lists share some characteristics with their services, those > who have to deal with GPDR may wish to consider it in developing > their own. > > [Among other things, GitLab's

Re: [Mailman-Users] [Mailman-cabal] GDPR

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > What is their working definition of "thread"? I don't know. I gave what I think is a reasonable definition, and I would argue that going to parents of that message is not required by GDPR, even if for some reason you need to remove whole posts. > I'm

Re: [Mailman-Users] GDPR

Ángel writes: > First of all, and I think it hasn't been mentioned yet is the Right > to access, ie. of letting people know which data you have about > them. > > I would consider that listing all post by email address X would > fulfill it, plus a search feature (*) in case they want to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Encoding issues when importing archives

Mark Sapiro writes: > > content = content.encode(decoding) > > > > UnicodeEncodeError: 'gb2312' codec can't encode character '\ufffd' in > > position 3131: illegal multibyte sequence > > > > Apparently the offending attachments are specified as gb2312 (a common > > Chinese encoding). >

Re: [Mailman-Users] [Mailman-cabal] GDPR

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > On 05/14/2018 06:33 AM, Andrew Hodgson wrote: > > Current advice from the GDPR people is we may have to delete the whole > > thread. > > What is their working definition of "thread"? I would imagine that it is the subthread rooted at the first post

Re: [Mailman-Users] [Mailman-cabal] GDPR

Julian H. Stacey writes: > Best action for least effort, IMO is first someone to agree to > commit a big default legal disclaimer in the Mailman source > distribution, as a This isn't going to happen if I have anything to say about it. (I may not have all that much to say about it! :-) As

Re: [Mailman-Users] [Mailman-cabal] GDPR

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > On 05/11/2018 04:55 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > ... > > I think the basic inconvenient truth is nobody's going to come after you > unless you have money to pay the settlement. I think the basic inconvenient truth is that *some*body *will* come after *some*body

[Mailman-Users] [Mailman-cabal] GDPR

I hate to disagree with everybody, but ... We need to get an articulare European lawyer, or at least find someone who has studied the subject. I don't know the credentials of anyone who has posted on this list, so I would be careful. There was a post a few months back listing a bunch of stuff

[Mailman-Users] Filtering Chinese spam.

Kenneth G. Gordon writes: > One of my mailman mailing lists has been suddenly afflicted with > tons of Chinese spam. If you have access to the firewall in your mail system, or are friendly with its admin, the most efficient way to handle this is in the firewall by dropping all traffic from

[Mailman-Users] [Suspected Spam]Re: Brute force attacks on mailman web ui

tlhackque writes: > So you know exactly who your users are, and can pre-register them > while they are not in China. No. China may, or may not, block any given email provider without warning. They may need to provide a new address *from that address* (or their mother's, which I also don't

Re: [Mailman-Users] Brute force attacks on mailman web ui

tlhackque via Mailman-Users writes: > I'm not sure what you are looking for. I'm looking for anything that will help block swaths of Chinese spammers and possibly attacks, while allowing me to do a better job of serving students vacationing at home in China than treating them the way the

Re: [Mailman-Users] 'from' header at delivered email from inside / outside organization

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 04/19/2018 03:17 AM, kan...@yamachu-tokachi.co.jp wrote: > > Expected behavior: > > > > a. When a sender is outside of our organization (abc.co.jp), the > > received mail should show original sender's email address at 'from' header. > > b. When a sender is inside

Re: [Mailman-Users] Brute force attacks on mailman web ui

Rich Kulawiec writes: > Brute force attacks can be pre-emptively blocked by nearly everyone > operating a Mailman instance. (I say "nearly" for specific reasons > that will become clear below.) Nice summary! > 3. The next step depends on the intended audience for your mailing > lists. So

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > On 2/5/2018 12:29 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > [various stuff, citation line preserved to make a point below] > You don't mention what your "smart reply" does with To and CC > addresses.  Discards them, I assume? Yes. It's intended to do what

Re: [Mailman-Users] Message-ID required - was: Reply-to options not working

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > Heh. I personally believe that a message sent by a mailing list > *must* have the mailing list as the originator: dkim, id, and > whatever else. First, please be careful with terminology. *Originator* is well-defined (RFC 5598) as the agent of the Author that first

Re: [Mailman-Users] Message-ID required

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 02/05/2018 12:22 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > > > According to RFC, Message-ID is an originator field, and MUST be > > present and MUST be unique. > > Do you have a reference for this? I thought this was correct, but I > rec

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > Just because an MUA isn't on the Internet, does not mean that it > shouldn't play by the same or very similar rules. If it doesn't DWIM, I don't use it. But that's not the same as talking about conformance of clients. The question is whether the MUA

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > If you have "smart reply" as a separate function, yes.  If you have > the typical "Reply" and "Reply All", and the mailing list software > sets "Reply-To: ", then replying to the author is awkward and > error-prone. Sure, but in this thread we all agree that Reply-To

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > Does it ave the same Message-ID though? According to RFC, Message-ID is an originator field, and MUST be present and MUST be unique. The MUA or submission agent should add it before handing off to the MTA. As a last resort the MTA may add it. If it gets past the MTA

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > On 2018-01-29 23:51, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > ... [ Reply-To ] should have a checkbox "same as my > > From address." > > Oh, great, now I'll rreecceeiivvee eevveerryytthhiinngg > ttwwiiccee.. No, that's not the way

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > make everybody happy That's a longer way of expressing "right." I'm *still* not interested in that. > I can only hope that whatever standards develop make both "reply to > author" and "reply to all" convenient. No MUA is going to remove either of those functions. >

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > You were complaining that in some list configurations you will tend to > get multiple copies of a message - one directly to you, and one via the > list. > > I was suggesting that one way to address that complaint would be for > your mail client to detect the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Chip Davis writes: > I have a constant problem with well-meaning, but essentially > ignorant, email users who, upon seeing a "Reply To:" field in their > MUA's setup screen, dutifully fill it in with their email address. > Then they complain that even though they "replied to the list", >

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > I want "Reply" to go to the author, and "Reply All" to go to the author, > the list, and any other To or CC destinations.  I simply can't > understand any other answer.  I don't understand why anybody feels a > need for "Reply List". Your preference is noted, but you

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > On 01/24/2018 01:50 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > 2. Else if there is a List-Post, address the message to List-Post. > > I don't think that it's appropriate to always prefer the List-Post over > the From ~> Reply-To. OK

Re: [Mailman-Users] Photos from Macs getting removed by list server

Peter Shute writes: > I wonder how much dangerous javascript in email is these days. The #infosec and #bitcoin tweeps I follow are all a-twitter about javascript that mines bitcoins, which is pretty seriously energy- and cpu-intensive. (They have opinions at opposite poles though. :-) It

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

I'd appreciate if those who have strong opinions on this would take a look at the analysis below and tell me if I'm missing something. If not, maybe I'll write up a BCP (non-standards-track RFC[1]) so it's on record. This proposal actually has a history going back to about 2005. I didn't do

[Mailman-Users] Photos from Macs getting removed by list server

Peter Shute writes: > Evidence for these symptoms is partly anecdotal, so might not be > exactly right. It’s hard to get information from users about > exactly which device and which program they used to create the > emails. Has anyone else seen the same things? Is there any easy fix > for

Re: [Mailman-Users] MM3 book in the works

Besides Rich's forthcoming book, Barry has an existing chapter on Mailman's architecture in The Architecture of Open Source Applications, Vol. II (eds. Amy Brown and Greg Wilson). Tom Browder writes: > On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 12:07 Rich Kulawiec wrote: > > I've been working on a

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman CSRF Vulnerability

Lindsay Haisley writes: > Probably what I'm talking about. Hmm... This is a good sign! > I only partially understand this, Mark. I'll need to sit down and study > it. Thanks! Do it soon. It's as easy as you think it is. Modern VCSes are good at this. "VCS means never having to say 'I'm

[Mailman-Users] VCSing your local changes [was: Mailman CSRF Vulnerability]

Lindsay Haisley writes: > Probably what I'm talking about. Hmm... This is a good sign! > I only partially understand this, Mark. I'll need to sit down and study > it. Thanks! Do it soon: it's as easy as you think it is! Modern VCSes are good at this. "VCS means never having to say 'I'm

Re: [Mailman-Users] mm_cfg

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > Fair enough but I should think expecting site-specific settings to > live under /etc is no longer distro-specific and that mm_cfg.py > violates the principle of least surprise for any distro since > fsstnd. Fair enough, but the distros already have scripts that

Re: [Mailman-Users] options for dealing with DMARC

Jordan Brown writes: > per se.  I don't want to turn on any domain-global rejection of > "failing" mail, because I wouldn't want to reject messages sent to the > non-mailing-list addresses. You should think twice about that. The reason why AOL and Yahoo! have turned on the reject policy is

Re: [Mailman-Users] Removing archived spam

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > Heh. You made me look. No, contrary to the popular belief LiGNUx did not > invent the world, There is no such thing as LiGNUx. Stallman may have his fingers in a lot of software (to my everlasting annoyance; he wrote, and at last check circa 2013 continues to write,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Funding Campaign for GNU Mailman

Hal via Mailman-Users writes: > [The FSF donation page for GNU Mailman is] apparently working now. > At least for me and using Paypal. Do you mean you used it with a screen reader for the visually impaired? If so, what screen reader were you using? Steve

Re: [Mailman-Users] Removing archived spam

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > well, given /bin/arch and its importance to packagers and such, you'd > have to agree that bin/arch was perhaps not the best choice of name. > ;) Yup, and pretty sure Mailman's was first. There's a reason why namespaces were invented.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Suppress moderation message in mailman 2.1 ?

John R Levine writes: > > Why not, when sending usenet posts to the list, merely change the > > 'from' address to yourself (or a special-purpose mailbox, or > > something)? This would require only changes to stuff you made > > yourself (the usenet -> list processing). > > I'd think the

[Mailman-Users] "Bounce action notification" emails for subscribes/unsubscribes

Terry . writes: > Any comments on any of this, Mark or anyone else, especially re > this claim: "...this is a result of an upstream design choice from > Mailman not from cPanel, As I understand it, the "design choice" meant is to have a sitewide address "mail...@site.tld". This isn't so much

Re: [Mailman-Users] A rant on parsing RFCs

Ruben Safir writes: > RFCs are a record of a process. Partially true. The process almost invariably leaves its trace in the text, and (as in any committee work) many compromises are inexplicable without reference to the process. But the text of an RFC is a specification, not a narrative. >

[Mailman-Users] A rant on parsing RFCs

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > RFC 6377 - DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) and Mailing Lists, > disagrees with you. (RFC 6377 is also currently known as BCP 167.) tl;dr version: RFC 5598 (non-normative but authoritative) disagrees with you. In practice, the mailing list *decides*

Re: [Mailman-Users] cause of bounces

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > IMHO, DMARC is going to eventually become the new norm. It has been so since late 2015, according to the DMARC Consortium. At that time they claimed that 80% of legitimate email was originated at domains that participate in DMARC reporting protocols. I

Re: [Mailman-Users] cause of bounces

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > That does not contradict what I said. Low specificity means low > probability of detection of "bad stuff". I.e. it doesn't mean much that > most of it passes. That may be true for you, but for most of us having most of our mail have a valid DKIM signature, plus a

Re: [Mailman-Users] cause of bounces

Mark Sapiro writes: > I don't agree that it is a completely new message. I think it is > still the original message with only technical and formatting > changes. The IETF's position is that this decision is up to the forwarding agent. If they change the Message-ID, that means they consider

Re: [Mailman-Users] cause of bounces

Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users writes: > I use DKIM validity as a signal that I then make decisions based on. - > Hence why I have chosen to alter spam score on my mail server based on > the DKIM result. You can do that. But call it what it is: a deliberate decision NOT to conform to a

Re: [Mailman-Users] cause of bounces

This whole thread reminds me of an evangelical arguing with a Jesuit. 2000 years of Bible study does make for strong debating! Please note that the Sender/From distinction *and* the semantic interpretations of those fields go back to RFC 733 (1977!) at least, and the Society of Jesus, er, IETF

Re: [Mailman-Users] cause of bounces

Mark Sapiro writes: > Are you suggesting that we ignore bounces that can be determined to be > due to DMARC policy. Not *completely* ignore. There are several independent actions we can take based on bounces, depending on list option settings. I'm suggesting only that we not increment the

Re: [Mailman-Users] cause of bounces

tl;dr I miswrote when I wrote that Hotmail is a problem sending domain. It never was and currently is not. I was thinking of AOL which was and is a problem. The rest of this post explains why DMARC is a mostly good thing, including a *very* high-level view of what it is good *for*. Mark Sapiro

Re: [Mailman-Users] cause of bounces

@mark: The Hotmail error message does make it sufficiently clear that these bounces are due to DMARC. I will probably file an RFE to catch these against Mailman 3. Would you like me to do that for Mailman 2, or is this "obvously not worth it" in your opinion? (I intend to supply code

[Mailman-Users] spam discard expressions

Sorry, I've been ignoring Mailman for a few days, and I guess you've got a solution that works already. This is a pair of alternatives that each have some advantages and disadvantages compared to your regexp-based solution. FWIW, YMMV Jim Dory writes: > Apparently our host provider performs

Re: [Mailman-Users] "Bounce action notification" emails for subscribes/unsubscribes

Terry . writes: > Sorry for the delay in responding, and thanks for your generous > offer of working with my webhost and/or cPanel to solve this. I > passed that offer to my webhost, but it seems they have been able > to sort it out with cPanel themselves. > I then tested lists in all 7

Re: [Mailman-Users] Users being unsubscribed without requesting it.

Julian H. Stacey writes: > Some people are clueless thus forward without pruning. While I strongly agree with you that pruning is a great idea, and award bonus points to those who prune, I think "clueless" is unfair. Granted, "leaking" personalized links is a pretty serious issue and people

[Mailman-Users] About "qq" and "163" [was: Distributed mass subscribe attack?]

Mark Sapiro writes: > What I've seen recently is massive non-member posts in chinese to > maulman-us...@mailman3.org from addresses of the form Eh! ^^^ Barry is not going to be pleased! :^) > string_of_dig...@qq.com For future reference, qq.com does not appear to support mailboxes with

Re: [Mailman-Users] Customize "From" when munging it for DMARC?

Jordan Brown writes: > Alas, no. I've seen too many messages intended to be private sent to > the entire list with that configuration; I would never use it. Good for you! I'm sorry that means that the suggestion is useless to you, though. Steve

Re: [Mailman-Users] Customize "From" when munging it for DMARC?

Jordan Brown writes: > What I'm objecting to is the fact that it hunts down *other* instances > of the address in From and removes them (or perhaps replaces them with > the Reply-To and then eliminates duplicates). I think Reply-All should > take {Reply-To, else From}, To, and CC, and reply

[Mailman-Users] How to check if E-mail from Mailman was opened by the subscriber ?

Dlugasny via Mailman-Users writes: > Is it possible to get some how any statistics about Mailman E-mails > opened by the users ? I simply would like to be informed if user > opened an E-mail. WIll it be possible ? Mailman itself has no such option. See other replies for possible ways to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Authenticated Received Chain in Mailman?

Henry Yen writes: > Do you think your analysis will change now that AOL and Yahoo! are > now both part of Verizon? I really don't know. It depends on whether Verizon management is willing to leave well enough alone. Email abuse is a very hard problem, so if they try to make big changes,

[Mailman-Users] Authenticated Received Chain in Mailman?

[My apologies, I drafted this a couple days ago, but never finished it.] Brett Delmage writes: > Will Mailman 2 or 3 be incorporating Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) > http://arc-spec.org/ ? We will be doing so in Mailman 3, probably by mid-July for the Gitlab trunk, and planned for

Re: [Mailman-Users] Authenticated Received Chain in Mailman?

Joseph Brennan writes: > Wonderful, another offering of "This document is not an Internet > Standards Track specification; it is published for informational > purposes" adding further complexity to email in a mad attempt to make > up for the "potential" (?) problems that the previous

Re: [Mailman-Users] list sponsorships

Matt Morgan writes: > Yes, that's a great example, thanks!. I'd also love to see examples of a > sponsor message that's in the email messages (headers, footers, > digests) Subject header: not enough room. X-Face: you'd have to rotate sponsors if more than one, and it gets attached to From so

Re: [Mailman-Users] Targeted attack against german universities using mailman

Mark Sapiro writes: > Unless there is some serious bug that I've never seen before, Mailman > will not hold a post and also deliver it to the list members without > moderator approval. I guess it's possible that there's some kind of backdoor in the configuration, such that the post goes to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Cannot approve a moderation-held post

Phil Stracchino writes: > Aha! I *do* redirect HTTP to HTTPS. However, I'd already done all of > the steps in that document, as well as some other measures ... EXCEPT > the fix_url, which I did not know I needed to do. The problem is now > solved. Thanks! Mark, would it be possible and

[Mailman-Users] forwarding email to a mailman list

Mark T writes: > Hi can anyone tell me how do I use a forwarding > Email address on a members only mailing list > to my email list This is definitely a list managed by Mailman? > Only tried to do this and just keeps saying moderated What reason does it give for moderating the message?

Re: [Mailman-Users] Unsubscriptions after DMARC fix

Lindsay Haisley writes: > is an accomplished musician Barry encourages participation by musicians! Not official Barry-spokesman, but reasonably good at channeling :-) -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] DMARC issue with Mailman List

Mark Sapiro writes: > > Our configuration is that our web site integration with PayPal has PayPal > > sending confirmation emails to a mailman list called treasurer-alias, so > > that multiple people are aware of the PayPal transaction. > > PayPal.com publishes DMARC p=reject. Your

Re: [Mailman-Users] Unsubscribe line missing

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 03/14/2017 02:10 AM, Bill Healy wrote: > > > > Some members are reporting that the one click unsubscribe notice > > at the end of emails is not there and that they have to write individually > > to the list moderator to have their email removed. On the other hand, it

Re: [Mailman-Users] removing individual email headers from digest

Mark Sapiro writes: > Of course, you are free to remove any headers you don't want, but this > makes your digest non-compliant and Steve's point about Message-ID: and > threading in exploded digests is valid although without References: or > In-Reply-To:, Message-ID: alone is not to useful

[Mailman-Users] removing individual email headers from digest

Jim Dory writes: Warnings: > Message-ID: line since that means nothing to the end user, and the If you have any digest subscribers with decent MUAs who are exploding the digest into individual messages, or treating it as a folder, and therefore would be able to respond to individual messages,

[Mailman-Users] Fwd: Re: Mailing list membership.

willi uebelherr writes: > Dear friends of Mailman, Thanks for getting in touch! > in the IETF discussion list we have a discussion about the bounces, that > are created based on the DMARC processing. > > I know, from a discussion in this mailman list, that mailman follow > strong the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Change date sent to date held message was released?

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 01/24/2017 01:32 PM, Ryan C Stasel wrote: > > Is it possible to change the date sent on an email sent to a > > moderated list to be the date that the message was “released” > > from hold? > > > Not without modifying the code, but Mailman does add an >

Re: [Mailman-Users] Recent trouble with DMARC Munging

Scott Neader writes: > Thanks for your support and understanding, Mark, and especially for > not making us feel bad or looking down upon us for utilizing such a > control panel system to support our customers and their myriad > needs. As far as I can tell nobody in the Mailman crew has ever

Re: [Mailman-Users] Recent trouble with DMARC Munging

Lindsay Haisley writes: > I don't believe that the python DNS resolver module is a stock part of > the python distribution. It is not, as of 3.6. -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman Hosting

Odhiambo Washington writes: > Okay, so Exim and Postfix act the same in their default configs > unless one changes it. Mark (Dale), does your Postfix act the same > way? I think it doesn't and maybe it's something you need to take a > second look at?? Mark Dale's posts demonstrate knows his

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman Hosting

Mark Dale writes: > Verizon began accepting mail again for lists on the European server > about 6 hours ago. Yay! And thank you for that followup. -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Spam to "-request" address generating backscatter spam

Mark Sapiro writes: > I can see that if your attackers get smarter, the real name check could > be useful, but I'm not ready to add that as a feature. That could change > if they successfully attack me, but that hasn't happened yet. Based on past experience, by "me" Mark means "you, too".

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman Hosting

Mark Dale writes: > We haven't brushed Odhiambo off, but rather have worked with him on this > problem trying to fix it. However, I'm sorry if I gave the impression that you did, everything Odhiambo wrote indicates that you have been very helpful, and I took that for granted. By support

[Mailman-Users] Mailman Hosting

Odhiambo Washington writes: > mails, but majority of the subscribers are with Verizon/ATT and that has > really affected one list that I have so I need to change. Do you have a reason to think a change will help? As you say, they're notorious for blocking list emails. I doubt their criteria

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman-Users Digest, Vol 154, Issue 30

Glen Page writes: > Thanks. I am pretty sure that the only thing I deleted was the > sender name so not sure which header fields you think are missing. I thought MIME-Version was missing, but it's in your post so I must have deleted that early, and forgot I did that. According to Mark his

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman-Users Digest, Vol 154, Issue 30

Glen Page writes: > We are a Google Apps for Education school so most of our employees > and students are using gmail but with our own thet.net > domain. We have mx records for gmails servers > and for our in house mailman server. Recently edited our DNS zones > due to SPF

[Mailman-Users] Spam to "-request" address generating backscatter spam

Edward Hasbrouck writes: > (2) Spam with forged "From:" headers is sent to > "listname-requ...@domain.com". > How can I stop this? I am willing to give up "subscribe to this list by > e-mail", and require all subscriptions to be via the Web. Set Privacy Options | subscribe_policy to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Find a smtp server to send out emails

Dominik Hoffmann writes: > P.S.: I have a stinking suspicion that the primary reason for > Verizon's is not to combat spam, as stated, but to make it harder > for their subscribers to be in a position where switching ISPs is > easy, because they already use email addresses not tied to the >

Re: [Mailman-Users] Expressions to reduce spam

Cyndi Norwitz writes: > As for "everyone should learn regular expressions”... Not everyone. Just *some* list admins whose security professionals are unresponsive, or who are their own security admins. > Sure, maybe. But I think it’s overkill. I mean I don’t require > all my soap customers

Re: [Mailman-Users] my messages not appearing on the digest or single messages

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 11/22/2016 04:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > > On 11/22/16 5:32 PM, Marvin Hunkin wrote: > >> Hi. subscribe to a list called chat-requ...@list.ntxability.org, when > >> I send > >> my messae and get a digest or individual messages, I do not see my > >> message. > >>

[Mailman-Users] Changing MTAs on Mailman box

Bryan Carbonnell writes: > Is there anything on the Mailman side that I need to do after the > change? The Postfix integration may recommend putting cron scripts and init scripts in a different place. Make sure that any such scripts and their invocations installed for Sendmail are removed or

Re: [Mailman-Users] list_members when listname has a period

Mark Dale writes: > Hi, > > I'm using version 2.1.23 What operating system is used by your host? What is your MTA? Are you using a service manager such as cPanel or Plesk? Have you applied any patches to Mailman? While I cannot rule out a Mailman problem, as far as I know embedded periods

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman and Mimecast

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 11/18/2016 09:42 AM, Hirayama, Pat wrote: > > Problem 1: One list gets their email rejected with a 550 Rejected by > > header based Anti-Spoofing policy: ... > > https://community.mimecast.com/docs/DOC-1369#550 > > > > If I am reading the referenced > >

[Mailman-Users] mailman sending password reminders to members no longer subscribed

Jim Dory writes: > I've gotten a couple complaints today from ex-members on our subscription > only mailman list What do you mean by "subscription only"? That's not a term we use as far as I know. > after they received password reminders. They are not subscribed, How do you know that? >

[Mailman-Users] mailman sending password reminders to members no longer subscribed

Jim Dory writes: > I've gotten a couple complaints today from ex-members on our subscription > only mailman list What do you mean by "subscription only"? That's not a term we define as far as I know. > after they received password reminders. They are not subscribed, How do you know that?

[Mailman-Users] Reply Bodies as Attachments

r...@rexgoode.com writes: > I'm having the same problem on all of my lists, which most people read > on their Android or IOS devices. > > When I send something out, if anyone replies, it is delivered with my > defined header and footer, but the body is an attachment which can't be >

[Mailman-Users] cannot subscribe from outside using web interface

Camelia Botez writes: > Our mailman server is on DMZ and a couple of month ago was changed > to work https. > From inside LAN we can access mailman.domain/mailman/listinfo/test > and subscribe using browser interface. > From outside LAN we get : > The site cannot be reachedmailman.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] stopping cross posting?

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 10/10/2016 05:44 PM, Adam Morris wrote: > > People send messages to a list I run as well as other lists that I have > > nothing to do with. > > > > When people reply to the message sent to other lists the replies go to > > my list as well as the list they replied

[Mailman-Users] Message.UserNotification vs Message.OwnerNotification in Handlers/Hold.py

Jim Popovitch writes: > I've noticed that Mailman "hold" notifications (to:list-owner@) > fail DMARC (if the mailing list domain has a _dmarc RR) because of > a simple code issue. (not calling it a bug at this point) I don't see how direct mail can fail DMARC if the list's host MTA is

Re: [Mailman-Users] moderated usenet newsgroup gateway

Gérald Niel writes: > Le 07/10/2016 18:44, Gérald Niel a écrit : > > but nothing working. > > sorry for the noise, it was a mistake on the hostname of the newsserver. > Find de solution after look at the logs ! No need for an apology, sometimes even Mark needs to look twice! :-) And thank

[Mailman-Users] Personalised mails, content very depending on mail client

Henrik Rasmussen writes: > Is there something I, as site admin, or the list-admins can do, to > get personalized HTML mails, even to Outlook users? There is nothing you can do about the header/footer as admin. Mailman is not changing the mail since you can see the expected in GMail. See

Re: [Mailman-Users] unbanning a member?

I'm going to assume you meant to post to the list, and send there myself. For security reasons, Mailman lists do not munge reply-to. Frequently messages contain private information (IP addresses, domain names, email addresses, and even passwords) that the sender would not want broadcasted to a

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >