Mailman 3 July 2019 - Mailman-Developers

before next release: disable backscatter in default installation
by Jo Rhett 07 Nov '22

07 Nov '22

Hi. There's a fairly simple problem here that needs to be addressed. And it's mostly a documentation/install problem. I'm hoping we can get this resolved before the next release. PROBLEM: Mailman comes out of the box ready to backscatter spam people. Yes, it's easy enough to fix. But because it comes stock this way, and is documented to install this way, most people install it to do this. Those of us who work in abuse departments are tired of hearing "well that's how Mailman works". We also object to having to teach people how to fix their mailman installations because it's not documented in the current manual. This is *exactly* like Sendmail 14 years ago. We didn't accept it then, and Sendmail fixed the problem. RESOLUTION: Mailman default installation should not backscatter in a default configuration. 1. Don't create backscatter aliases for subscribe/unsubscribe/etc by default. Nearly everyone uses web based signup. 2. Discard or hold messages from non-subscribers by default. I would think that it would be perfectly reasonable to have documentation on how to enable the 1980s-style -request / -subscribe etc aliases. However this documentation should have a note that this is against the AUP of nearly every network provider, and enabling it will likely cause them to get listed in various blacklists as a backscatter source. FYI: I know that this goes against the instincts of many old-time mailing list advocates here. But after dealing with a 10k/hour backscatter DoS my tolerance for this problem is understandably limited. Yes, it was a sweet day back in the 1980s. I was running a mailing list server and several UUCP gateways at the time, so I remember them well. But those days are past, and we need to deal with the reality of today. -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness

21 168

Implementing `bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings_interval` in `Send_Warnings` function.
by Aaryan Bhagat 20 Aug '19

20 Aug '19

I am developing the processing of bounce messages as my GSoC project. Currently the `Bounce Functions` are being developed in [this](https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/merge_requests/538) pr on GitLab. There is one `bool` attribute called `bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings_interval` in the `Mailing List` model. It means >The number of days between each disabled notification. Implementing this has a problem - Say in the case of `process_bounces` function which processes the `BounceEvents` function it is easy it just takes one by one the events from the database and processes them. - In the case of `Send_Warnings` function if the same approach was followed, meaning it would take one by one the `Address` instances, check tuples in the `bounce_info` attribute ( see the pr for this ) and see whether to send a warning mail or not to can be a slow method. - Let's suppose the `Addresses` list is very long, then an `Address` instance in the very bottom of the list whose subscription has been disabled and some warning emails send, now waits to receive another mail as the interval is more than `bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings_interval`. - If the function is enumerating from the top then in order to take action first it has to reach this `Address` instance but the interval is already crossed. This can cause slow performance as the `warning mail` will be sent way late than it actually should have been sent. - Also if I am implementing 2 functions `process_bounces` and `send_warnings` what if both of them attempted at the same `Address` instance? - Basically `implementation on sending warning mails` and `implementation to increase bounce_score` are separate things and they can cause problems if they processed the same instance. Pointers on above will be helpful. Am I missing something above?

3 15

Cannnot find the processing of bounces as `hard` and `soft`
by Aaryan Bhagat 20 Jul '19

20 Jul '19

Somewhat details regarding this can be found in [this](https://mail.python.org/archives/list/mailman-developers@python.org/t… thread also. Currently, in the `mailman/src/mailman/runners/bounce.py` I do not see whether the separation of bounces as `hard` and `soft` is implemented. According to the previous version of Mailman, the `bounce_score` is increased accordingly ( see the `Bounce processing` section of [this](https://wiki.list.org/DOC/Mailman%202.1%20List%20Administrators%20Man… page ) depending upon the type of bounce. I intend to follow that implementation. If not required I can drop that implementation and just increase the `bounce_score` as an integer always. Pointers on this issue are appreciated. Am I missing something here?

3 4

flufl.lock._lockfile.NotLockedError: Already unlocked
by Aaryan Bhagat 20 Jul '19

20 Jul '19

I have started working on [this](https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/merge_requests/538) pr. It is regarding various bounce_process functions. Strange behaviour is observed which I am not so sure what or why is happening. Unexpected Traceback error pops up in my terminal. >File "/home/aaryan/mailman/mailman/src/mailman/bin/master.py", line 580, in main > loop.loop() > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/mailman/src/mailman/bin/master.py", line 401, in loop > self._pause() > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/mailman/src/mailman/bin/master.py", line 391, in _pause > signal.pause() > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/mailman/src/mailman/bin/master.py", line 267, in sigalrm_handler > self._lock.refresh() > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/venv3/lib/python3.7/site-packages/flufl.lock-3.2-py3.7.egg/flufl/lock/_lockfile.py", line 184, in refresh >flufl.lock._lockfile.NotLockedError: <Lock /home/aaryan/mailman/mailman/var/locks/master.lck [unlocked: 1 day, 6:00:00] pid=7596 at 0x7f54af802320x>: None > >During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred: > >Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/mailman/src/mailman/bin/master.py", line 583, in main > os.remove(config.PID_FILE) >FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/home/aaryan/mailman/mailman/var/master.pid' > >During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred: > >Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/venv3/bin/master", line 11, in <module> > load_entry_point('mailman', 'console_scripts', 'master')() > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/venv3/lib/python3.7/site-packages/Click-7.0-py3.7.egg/click/core.py", line 764, in __call__ > return self.main(*args, **kwargs) > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/venv3/lib/python3.7/site-packages/Click-7.0-py3.7.egg/click/core.py", line 717, in main > rv = self.invoke(ctx) > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/venv3/lib/python3.7/site-packages/Click-7.0-py3.7.egg/click/core.py", line 956, in invoke > return ctx.invoke(self.callback, **ctx.params) > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/venv3/lib/python3.7/site-packages/Click-7.0-py3.7.egg/click/core.py", line 555, in invoke > return callback(*args, **kwargs) > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/mailman/src/mailman/bin/master.py", line 585, in main > lock.unlock() > File "/home/aaryan/mailman/venv3/lib/python3.7/site-packages/flufl.lock-3.2-py3.7.egg/flufl/lock/_lockfile.py", line 287, in unlock >flufl.lock._lockfile.NotLockedError: Already unlocked I think some configuration of mailman is conflicting. One point to mention is the `var` was created when I was working on some other branch. Maybe deleting the var and running `mailman start` will solve it? Not many leads are there hence I though best asking this. Pointers to this problem are appreciated Am I missing something here?

2 2

Integration of Mailman 3 with LDAP
by sandeep kumar 16 Jul '19

16 Jul '19

Hi Team We want to integrate LDAP authentication for a user to login into postorious. When a user tries to login, he should be authenticated by an LDAP instead of getting authenticated using the credentials saved in the mailman database. What file should be edited and any small clue would be welcome. -- Regards Sandeep Kumar +91-9642669192

2 5

Integration of SMS alerts for moderator approval
by sandeep kumar 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

Hi Team We are using mailman 2 in our production and we are testing mailman 3 to use in production. We have requirement in mailman 3 that is when a moderator receives email notification for a list posted he should also receive SMS alerts saying that so and so list is pending for approval.We have our SMS gateway setup and we are using this sending otp's,alerts etc.., now we want to integrate this service in sending moderator approval alerts Please provide a path and your valuable inputs to achieve this. This would be useful in future releases of mailman also. -- Regards Sandeep Kumar +91-7702033396

4 7

Next release of Mailman suite is coming up
by Abhilash Raj 10 Jul '19

10 Jul '19

Hi All, I am hoping to cut releases of all the Mailman projects in next two weeks or so. I'll probably release an rc-1 for packaging teams to test out before the final version goes out. There are a few new dependencies that have been added to both Core and Web components, so some of them might need work in packaging. This will be mostly a minor version bump (patch version technically for us e.g. 3.2.3 for Core), since there are no backwards incompatible changes. There are new features which will be included in this release. A full changelog will follow the rc release, but each individual projects have their changelogs up-to-date. If there are bug fixes you are working on, that you'd really like to get in, please let me know by end of this week. -- thanks, Abhilash Raj (maxking)

1 0