On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 15:01 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Brad Knowles wrote:
> 
> >Matt Hoskins wrote:
> >
> >>   1) Be able to configure the "-request" auto responder to not reply if
> >> there were no valid commands included in the message (the spammers
> >> aren't spamming with valid commands at the moment)
> >
> >That sounds like a really good idea.
> >
> >>   2) Be able to configure the "-request" auto responder to not reply to
> >> non-members
> >
> >Not so sure about this one, but it might also be an idea to consider.
> >
> >
> Speaking as a developer, we are aware of the spam
> reflection/backscatter issues with Mailman, and we want to address
> them. Steps will be taken in Mailman 2.2 to at least reduce this
> problem.
> 
> Thanks for your ideas, and as Brad suggests, if you want to follow up
> on [email protected] or submit further suggestions, we'd
> be happy to get them.

Thanks for the reply - reassuring to know 2.2 is going to improve the
situation :). If any further ideas spring to mind I'll be sure to post
'em.

Matt


------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9

Reply via email to