Implicit destination default action RFE
Ok, this is driving me bonkers. We get a ton of spam that is sent to our lists as implicit destinations. There is no way to automatically discard these messages under Mailman 2.1.1 (Python 2.2.2 on Solaris9)
As an RFE, could a feature be added along the lines of the default handler for posts from non-members so that you can select what do to with mail for implicit destinations?
i.e. Under Privacy -> Recipient Filters
Action to take for postings to implicit destinations for which no
explicit action is defined. (Details for generic_implicit_action)
[ ] Accept [ ] Hold [ ] Reject [ ] Discard Right now the there is no option and all mail is held.
Thanks, Todd
On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 19:42, Todd Green wrote:
Ok, this is driving me bonkers. We get a ton of spam that is sent to our lists as implicit destinations. There is no way to automatically discard these messages under Mailman 2.1.1 (Python 2.2.2 on Solaris9)
As an RFE, could a feature be added along the lines of the default handler for posts from non-members so that you can select what do to with mail for implicit destinations?
i.e. Under Privacy -> Recipient Filters
Action to take for postings to implicit destinations for which no explicit action is defined. (Details for generic_implicit_action) [ ] Accept [ ] Hold [ ] Reject [ ] DiscardRight now the there is no option and all mail is held.
I have plans for rewriting the Hold/Moderate workflow so that you could do something like this much more easily. It's probably a MM3.0 thing.
-Barry
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 11:15:06AM -0400, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
I have plans for rewriting the Hold/Moderate workflow so that you could do something like this much more easily. It's probably a MM3.0 thing.
I'm trying to extend the current workflow to allow training of false negatives when using spambayes as the filter, so I'm very interested to have some info on your plans :)
-- Simone Piunno -- http://members.ferrara.linux.it/pioppo .------- Adde parvum parvo magnus acervus erit -------. Ferrara Linux Users Group - http://www.ferrara.linux.it Deep Space 6, IPv6 on Linux - http://www.deepspace6.net GNU Mailman, Mailing List Manager - http://www.list.org `-------------------------------------------------------'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
"baw" == Barry Warsaw "Re: [Mailman-Developers] Implicit destination default action RFE" 19 Apr 2003 11:15:06 -0400
baw> I have plans for rewriting the Hold/Moderate workflow so that
baw> you could do something like this much more easily.Another situation that it might be possible to address better than now arises when list owners/moderators are themselves the false senders of spam as well as the real senders of ham to the list. With announce lists (v 2.0.13) these folks (or their minions) are moderating _all_ mail including their own. It would be nice if they could automatically discard all mails except those mails pretending to be from themselves which they would want to continue to moderate.
jam-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQE+oXJJUEvv1b/iXy8RAgVPAJ9OQF2r+Sccs1A7LY8/8xlefdcYRACfRj0L HX85r9CCNmy4E3Qsh+cASug= =iUcY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 11:20, Simone Piunno wrote:
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 11:15:06AM -0400, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
I have plans for rewriting the Hold/Moderate workflow so that you could do something like this much more easily. It's probably a MM3.0 thing.
I'm trying to extend the current workflow to allow training of false negatives when using spambayes as the filter, so I'm very interested to have some info on your plans :)
Very briefly: Thomas Wouters and I talked a bit about this at Pycon. What I think we want to do is to apply all the tests on a message and keep track of all the results. Right now, the first test match short-circuits the rest of the tests.
Once we've done that, then we want to have a way for a list admin to build a ruleset for how the tests should map into one of the following states: accept, hold, reject, discard, defer. Defer would mean to apply the next rule in the ruleset, while the others are terminal states.
When a held message is shown to the moderator, they get to (perhaps optionally) see the complete match results for the message. So you might see e.g. implicit-destination, non-member-post, max-size.
Spambayes filtering would simply be another test to apply.
-Barry
participants (4)
-
Barry Warsaw -
jam＠jamux.com -
Simone Piunno -
Todd Green