On 5 Jan 2012, at 23:35, Monica Chew wrote:
> Hi Ian,
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>> …
...
>
>> Now, if Gmail also prominently exposed the list-unsubscribe header, then the
>> EU regulations on marketing messages would be satisfied. In my view, hiding
>> the unsub
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] feature request: one-click setting to
> preserve DKIM
>
> Possibly, but it depends on the level of individualization. If you're
> doing VERP or personalized footers you pretty much have to send one
> message per user.
Ah, quite right. I was only
On Jan 05, 2012, at 05:03 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> Actually, I was asking about the default for personalized vs. non-
>> personalized delivery. Right now, the default is to send all users the
>> same copy of the message (with some configurable batching sizes) in
>> order to reduce networ
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] feature request: one-click setting to
> preserve DKIM
>
> Actually, I was asking about the default for personalized vs. non-
> personalized delivery. Right now, the default is to send all users the
> same copy of the message (with some configurable
On Jan 05, 2012, at 04:32 PM, Monica Chew wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:46 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> On Jan 04, 2012, at 01:23 PM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>>
>>>Finally, if Mailman allowed users to choose whether to get the footer added,
>>>and subject munged, then Gmail users might avoid these is
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:46 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jan 04, 2012, at 01:23 PM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>
>>Finally, if Mailman allowed users to choose whether to get the footer added,
>>and subject munged, then Gmail users might avoid these issues anyway.
>
> Of course, such level of option would
Hi Ian,
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>
> When a message comes from a Mailman mailing list, the headers carry far more
> useful identifying information than the From: header. In fact, the purported
> sender isn't in the From: header, it's in the List-ID: header. It would be
On Jan 04, 2012, at 01:23 PM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>Finally, if Mailman allowed users to choose whether to get the footer added,
>and subject munged, then Gmail users might avoid these issues anyway.
Of course, such level of option would require personalization, i.e. one
message per recipient. May
When a message comes from a Mailman mailing list, the headers carry far more
useful identifying information than the From: header. In fact, the purported
sender isn't in the From: header, it's in the List-ID: header. It would be
better if mail clients (like Gmail's web client) would display this
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 8:45 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> What do these DKIM-strict domains do with digests? Do they actually
> check the content (ie, individual messages) for source domain and
> verify their DKIM signatures?
Typically the digest appears to come from the list, so that's ok.
T
Barry Warsaw writes:
> My own personal feeling is that having lists re-sign messages is the best
> expectation to put forward. You're subscribed to a mailing list, so you
> trust
> that list much more than you trust the senders on that list.
But as Monica points out, sometimes you need to e
> My own personal feeling is that having lists re-sign messages is the best
> expectation to put forward. You're subscribed to a mailing list, so you trust
> that list much more than you trust the senders on that list. So having the
> mailing list site re-sign the outgoing messages seems to me to
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 12/5/2011 10:58 AM, Monica Chew wrote:
>
>> For context, I work at Google on Gmail spam, and one of the things we've
>> been doing as an anti-phishing measure is enforcing that mail from certain
>> highly-phished domains must be signed with t
Hi Terri,
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Terri Oda wrote:
> There were a lot of "it depends" in your email, so maybe I've mis-read, but
> it sounds to me like the long-term path of least user/list admin hassle for
> Mailman probably is to just re-sign the messages. Except that there's no
> sta
Hi,
> users will balk at having the subject line tags removed, and many list
> owners will balk at having unsubscribe footers removed,
Agreed. OTOH, if this were yet another setting, it would be the list owner's
decision to use it or not.
> That said, we've talked a lot about having simplifi
On Dec 06, 2011, at 12:36 PM, Terri Oda wrote:
>As a developer, this sounds the makings of one of those life-sucking projects
>you shouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole unless you're getting paid to define
>and defend a standard. There's no guarantee that anything we choose to do
>will ever be cons
On Dec 06, 2011, at 10:17 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> I think this is the one big lesson from these discussions: DKIM is
>> mostly incompatible with mailing lists. Where the two must be
>> integrated, some usability will likely be compromised.
>
>It depends on your expectations. If there's
On Dec 05, 2011, at 05:12 PM, Monica Chew wrote:
>> Mailman 3 supports list-styles, which in theory are composable. Coming up
>> with a good ui for that is a whole 'nuther issue, but the core could support
>> something like this fairly easily.
>
>Could you elaborate more? I couldn't turn up docum
On 12/5/2011 10:58 AM, Monica Chew wrote:
> For context, I work at Google on Gmail spam, and one of the things we've
> been doing as an anti-phishing measure is enforcing that mail from certain
> highly-phished domains must be signed with the DKIM key of the purported
> sender. We started this sev
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] feature request: one-click setting to
> preserve DKIM
>
> There were a lot of "it depends" in your email, so maybe I've mis-read,
> but it sounds to me like the long-term path of least user/list admin
> hassle for Mailman probably is to j
On 12/06/11 11:17, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
It depends on your expectations. If there's an expectation that the author's
signature will/should/must persist through a mailing list, then I agree that
they're largely incompatible. If on the other hand you intend for lists to
re-sign mail and
developers@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] feature request: one-click setting to
> preserve DKIM
>
> On Dec 05, 2011, at 03:50 PM, Monica Chew wrote:
> >Having worked in the DKIM-for-anti-phishing space for a couple of
> >years, there is no good way to solve t
> I'm no DKIM expert by far, but it seems to me that a mailing list message has
> enough clues that a DKIM verifier could do a better job at helping recipients
> make good choices. For example, all Mailman messages have a List-Id header
> that contains the domain name hosting the list server. Wit
On Dec 05, 2011, at 03:50 PM, Monica Chew wrote:
>Having worked in the DKIM-for-anti-phishing space for a couple of years,
>there is no good way to solve the DKIM problem in Mailman.
I think this is the one big lesson from these discussions: DKIM is mostly
incompatible with mailing lists. Where
Hi Terri,
Thanks for the response.
We have a significant complexity problem already in the admin interface.
> If this is really just a matter of two settings (subject tagging and
> unsubscribe footers) it would probably make more sense to add an
> appropriate FAQ entry / documentation rather tha
On 11-12-05 11:58 AM, Monica Chew wrote:
Terri and Florian, is this something that the webui group would be
interested in working on?
We have a significant complexity problem already in the admin
interface. If this is really just a matter of two settings (subject
tagging and unsubscribe foot
26 matches
Mail list logo
