Mailman 3 June 2008 - Mailman-Users

server load..
by Khalil Abbas June 5, 2008

June 5, 2008

hi guys, I posted this message a couple of days ago but didn't get any satisfying answers.. neither did I find a good answer in the Faq cause it's too "technical" .. so here's my message again: hi mailman guys .. my question is, I have a 100,000+ subscribers mailing list, and hosting it with godaddy.com (Celeron 2000, 2 GBs RAM) .. but they only allow 100,000 emails per day for each dedicated server, so I have to buy a new server now, and it's a bit expensive.. I found another cheap service, $… [View More]

4 4

ETA for MM 3.0?
by Jon Slater June 5, 2008

June 5, 2008

Does anyone have a guess-timate for the MM 3.0 release?

2 1

Virtual hosts and re-using list names
by Jon Slater June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

Hi, Is there a way to re-use list names for multiple virtual hosts without running multiple instances of MM? For example: members(a)mylist.com and members(a)yourlist.com on the same server? So far, the only solution I've found it to be cleaver with my list names (like members(a)mylist.com and everyone(a)yourlist.com. Thanks!

4 3

default language per virtual host
by R. Hirschfeld June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

Is it possible to configure the language used for the listinfo and admin overviews on a per-virtual-host basis? Or failing that, to let the user select a language in which to view these overview pages, as can be done for the listinfo and admin pages of a specific list? In my case the overviews should be in English for some virtual hosts and Dutch for others. Funnily enough, before a recent "unintentional upgrade" to version 2.1.9 of Mailman (a disk crash after which the sysadmin installed a … [View More]

2 2

mailman error after server crash
by Carlos Bergero June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

Hi there, a few weeks ago my mail server crashed and serveral files where damage, and placed in lost+found. For some reason the mailman system failed after that while starting the service i got the following error. Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/sbin/list_lists", line 122, in ? main() File "/usr/sbin/list_lists", line 94, in main mlist = MailList.MailList(n, lock=0) File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/MailList.py", line 130, in __init__ self.Load() File "/usr/lib/… [View More]

2 4

Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.10 patch release, was: Subscription errors
by Mark Sapiro June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

Duncan Drury wrote: > >Any chance of releasing a patched version of mailman as promised a while >back? Not everyone using Mailman will be up to patching or manually editing >the code, and like a I said - for me at least this bug was a showstopper - >and a nasty one because it was pretty silent. Had I not been setting up a >new list, I may not have realised there was a problem for many months during >which no new subscriptions would have been happening on my lists. The … [View More]

1 1

Major problems with privacy and mailman lists and harvesters
by Steve Murphy June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

Hello! I'm quite concerned about what I'm seeing in mailman installations, and the amount of spam I've been getting because I participate in mailman based lists! I'm not talking about halting spam that gets submitted to the list for mailing. I'm not talking about spambots automatically joining the lists and submitting spam. What I'm concerned about is the fact that email harvesters are being given so much information. I've noticed in the mailman-users archives, that if I view info by … [View More]thread (using the mailman archives as an example,) which site is 2.1.10 based, that all email addresses are present, but with a simple obfuscation. (the "@" has been changed to " at ".) I can't help but to think that this simple obfuscation is a joke. Any harvester written in the past number of years would be smart enough to capture such accurately. When viewing the developer's archives, I note that when a message is displayed singly, it is common to see [EMAIL PROTECTED]. This is much nicer, but I notice that in both archives, a button is provided at the bottom of the letter, that submits a form, and gets back both a "Found" page, with a mailto: url, and a redirect to a mailto... so, an anonymous user can easily get/harvest email addresses by simply analyzing the html form. The gzip'd archives by month for both lists both show all email addresses, with the " at " obfuscation. It seems inconsistent, funny even, that display by thread will show individual messages with [EMAIL REMOVED], but the gzip'd archives of the same message reveal, really, everything. And worse... If I really wanted to collect up-to-date juicy email addresses, I'd simply subscribe to all the mailman lists I possibly could, and route all the incoming messages to harvesters. In **This** case, the harvest is bountiful, as most messages arrive totally unfiltered, from headers galore bearing bounteous harvests of email addresses (for example, the From header), to the user sigs at the ends, with reply quotation headers mentioning the source addresses in between. Within MINUTES of my first posting on asterisk-users, I was getting spam on an email address that was brand-new. Since then, the spam volume on that email addr just keeps growing. I keep wondering, which way did they get my email addr? But, it doesn't matter. I can't help to think that 'targeted' spam mailers both spider the archives and subscribe to the lists.The bigger the list's subscription, hotter an item it is. So, please, can we apply the [EMAIL PROTECTED] tech to the archives, and the outgoing messages, and drop this silly notion that the " at " obfuscation is useful? Really, it's totally transparent. NO OBFUSCATION is safe in mailman. There's simply too much Can we drop the buttons from the archives whose HTML says: <FORM METHOD="POST" ACTION="/cgi-bin/Nomailto.pl"> <INPUT TYPE="HIDDEN" NAME="user" VALUE="barb"> <INPUT TYPE="HIDDEN" NAME="host" VALUE="nleaudiox.com"> <INPUT TYPE="HIDDEN" NAME="subject" VALUE="Re: [Mailman-Developers] Important Mailman 2.1.9 to 2.1.10 upgrade note."> <INPUT TYPE="HIDDEN" NAME="msgid" VALUE="480E15F1.50200(a)nleaudio.com"> Reply via email to<br> <INPUT TYPE="SUBMIT" VALUE=" Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED] "> </FORM> from which spam harvesters can almost instantly be updated to harvest "barb(a)nleaudiox.com" (modified from the orig to save the innocent author from a deluge of spam, at least on **my** account), without even submitting the form! We need to rethink how we can adequately keep emails out of spammers hands. And, yes, it's kinda unhandy not read a message and not be able to fire an email off to the author directly. But to make it easy for list subscribers, is to make it easy for spammers, who probably have already joined the list, and are delighted to get email addresses, any which way they can. Most discussion on mailing lists do not require any address other than the the mailing list itself. To take a discussion "offline", I propose a few ideas: 1. the mailing list allows the users to specify a phone-number, an irc channel and identity that they can be reached by, or some other method to contact the author, that is NOT an email address. This info is kept private, and the button at the bottom of the archived letters could give you this info. The person wanting to privately discuss the letter could then call the user or contact them via irc/jabber/whatever, and either discuss the matter there and then, or the author could voluntarily give the other party his email address at that time. Or file a list message, and ask the author to contact him, and give out a phone number, whatever. I thought about integrating spamgourmet throw-away email addresses, but really, that wouldn't help. Spammers could simply request, get the throw-away, spam it, and toss it. The user himself is the only one who can usefully hand out throw-away addresses. If you think mailman doesn't have to worry about this sort of thing, keep in mind that mailman has swiftly become probably the top mailing list software on the web. That spammers would not be interested in mining mailing lists for their tens of thousands of valid addresses is foolhardy thinking. That thinking the options that mailman provides now is adequate to keep spammers from harvesting email addrs, is just plain wrong. That datamining and de-obfuscation are NOT being done specifically for mailman lists is wishful thinking. Mailman needs to pay attention to the fact that spammers would **love** to use their mailing list installations to ship spam for them, AND ALSO that spammers will want to harvest email addresses from the web interface AND the mailings themselves. We need to lock down mailman, or at least make it an option! Simply put, in messages sent to users, the only email that should be found anywhere in a recieved message, is the recipient's. In the archived messages, absolutely no email addresses at all. Not even obfuscated. If we follow this pattern, the spammers will not be able to use mailman lists for any useful purpose. They'll have to hack the web sites to get the lists. murf -- Steve Murphy Software Developer Digium [View Less]

10 12

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailing list with no archive
by Laura Creighton June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

In a message of Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:38:36 PDT, Mark Sapiro writes: >Laura Creighton wrote: >> >> A mailing list that I am subscribed to, for reasons of privacy, has dec >ided >> to not archive its messages. I think this is an extremely silly idea, >but >> right now out of my control. My problem is that periodically I think I >> remember something useful having been posted there, and want to search >the >> non-existant archives -- because I … [View More]

1 0

Mailing list with no archive
by Laura Creighton June 3, 2008

June 3, 2008

A mailing list that I am subscribed to, for reasons of privacy, has decided to not archive its messages. I think this is an extremely silly idea, but right now out of my control. My problem is that periodically I think I remember something useful having been posted there, and want to search the non-existant archives -- because I forget they do not exist. The first erroneous piece of information I get is 'this archive is only searchable by list members'. So I try to log in to read the list, … [View More]

2 1

re-install postfix?
by Dov Oxenberg June 3, 2008

June 3, 2008

Good morning, Until Wednesday night my Server was running like a champ then suddenly, mysteriously, Postfix broke for no apparent reason. It is failing to start reporting "no local interface found for..." and citing some IP address which is invalid for my system. I have not been able to get anywhere since Wednesday night and am now considering uninstalling Postfix and then reinstalling. I realize this is a Postfix issue, but I wanted to ask what are the consequences of uninstalling Postfix, … [View More]

5 8