I have a list administrator who is on gmail. Forwarding held spam-messages to him does not work, since google rejects mail that has spam attached. Is it possible to send notification of pending actions *without* attaching the held message?
Håkon
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Håkon Alstadheim via Mailman-Users < mailman-users@python.org> wrote:
I have a list administrator who is on gmail. Forwarding held spam-messages to him does not work, since google rejects mail that has spam attached. Is it possible to send notification of pending actions *without* attaching the held message?
Hi Håkon.
This is an interesting question, and I'm interested in the answer. However, since your user happens to be using GMail, you DO have a good option to solve this:
The approval emails will come from:
FROM: listname-owner@example.com
The GMail user can simply create a "Filter" in GMail, that looks for messages "from:listname-owner@example.com" and check the box that says "Never send it to Spam". Here's how:
http://blog.simplelists.com/make-sure-real-emails-dont-get-sent-to-spam-gmai...
- Scott
On 03/31/2017 08:13 AM, Scott Neader wrote:
The GMail user can simply create a "Filter" in GMail, that looks for messages "from:listname-owner@example.com" and check the box that says "Never send it to Spam". Here's how:
http://blog.simplelists.com/make-sure-real-emails-dont-get-sent-to-spam-gmai...
I'm not certain, but I don't think this will work in this case. It will certainly work if the message is ending up in the user's spam folder, but I think the filtering is occurring earlier in this case. I.e., gmail rejects the message at incoming SMTP time per
550-5.7.1 [2a03:b0c0:2:d0::71:1 12] Our system has detected that this 550-5.7.1 message is likely unsolicited mail. To reduce the amount of spam sent 550-5.7.1 to Gmail, this message has been blocked. Please visit 550-5.7.1 https://support.google.com/mail/?p=UnsolicitedMessageError 550 5.7.1 for more information.
and the message never gets as far as the user's filters.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Den 31. mars 2017 17:13, skrev Scott Neader:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Håkon Alstadheim via Mailman-Users <mailman-users@python.org <mailto:mailman-users@python.org>> wrote:
I have a list administrator who is on gmail. Forwarding held spam-messages to him does not work, since google rejects mail that has spam attached. Is it possible to send notification of pending actions *without* attaching the held message?Hi Håkon.
This is an interesting question, and I'm interested in the answer. However, since your user happens to be using GMail, you DO have a good option to solve this:
The approval emails will come from:
FROM: listname-owner@example.com <mailto:listname-owner@example.com>The GMail user can simply create a "Filter" in GMail, that looks for messages "from:listname-owner@example.com <mailto:from%3Alistname-owner@example.com>" and check the box that says "Never send it to Spam". Here's how:
http://blog.simplelists.com/make-sure-real-emails-dont-get-sent-to-spam-gmai...
Slightly wrong description in my original report, I was jumping to conclusions. I see now it is my "smarthost" upstream outbound relay that is complaining, and rejecting (not just mis-filing):
Mar 31 09:05:51 garbo postfix-relay/smtp[27886]: 657FFC00036D: host smtp.altibox.no[109.247.116.10] said: 550 5.7.1 Rejected. This message has been marked as spam. client=148.252.117.52 job_id=441D780084 (in reply to end of DATA command)
So, I need to NOT send the attachment to get the "pending" mail to the list-admin.
On 03/31/2017 10:05 AM, Håkon Alstadheim via Mailman-Users wrote:
So, I need to NOT send the attachment to get the "pending" mail to the list-admin.
The only way to do that would be to modify the code in the hold_for_approval function in Mailman/Handlers/Hold.py, but why do you need to not send the attachment? As I indicate in my reply at <https://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2017-March/082071.html>, if the message is spam, why is there any urgency in notifying the admin of the held message? Isn't the next daily summary soon enough?
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Den 31. mars 2017 19:52, skrev Mark Sapiro:
On 03/31/2017 10:05 AM, Håkon Alstadheim via Mailman-Users wrote:
So, I need to NOT send the attachment to get the "pending" mail to the list-admin.
The only way to do that would be to modify the code in the hold_for_approval function in Mailman/Handlers/Hold.py, Thanks for the tip, I actually might do that. At least I feel I can give attempts at changing the config a rest.
but why do you
need to not send the attachment? As I indicate in my reply at <https://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2017-March/082071.html>, if the message is spam, why is there any urgency in notifying the admin of the held message? Isn't the next daily summary soon enough?
Sure, daily summary should be fine, but on a bad day these non-deliverable admin-emails will add up, and postfix keeps trying to deliver them. So my logs show quite a few failed delivery attempts. Queue of undeliverable mail grows. Neat-freak in me gets very jumpy.
Like I say elsewhere, slight mis-reporting on my part, it's my "smart-host" up-stream out-going smtp that is rejecting the mail w\ spam-attachments.
On 03/31/2017 12:12 PM, Håkon Alstadheim via Mailman-Users wrote:
Sure, daily summary should be fine, but on a bad day these non-deliverable admin-emails will add up, and postfix keeps trying to deliver them. So my logs show quite a few failed delivery attempts. Queue of undeliverable mail grows. Neat-freak in me gets very jumpy.
Like I say elsewhere, slight mis-reporting on my part, it's my "smart-host" up-stream out-going smtp that is rejecting the mail w
spam-attachments.
The "smart host" doesn't seem very smart if it is rejecting spam mail with a 4xx (retryable) and not a 5xx (failure) status.
Another thought is just turn off admin_immed_notify, but of course that will also turn off notices for mail that might not be spam.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Den 31. mars 2017 22:41, skrev Mark Sapiro:
On 03/31/2017 12:12 PM, Håkon Alstadheim via Mailman-Users wrote:
Sure, daily summary should be fine, but on a bad day these non-deliverable admin-emails will add up, and postfix keeps trying to deliver them. So my logs show quite a few failed delivery attempts. Queue of undeliverable mail grows. Neat-freak in me gets very jumpy.
Like I say elsewhere, slight mis-reporting on my part, it's my "smart-host" up-stream out-going smtp that is rejecting the mail w
spam-attachments.The "smart host" doesn't seem very smart if it is rejecting spam mail with a 4xx (retryable) and not a 5xx (failure) status.
Partly my fault I suppose, I've got various settings tuned to avoid losing mail during testing of my new mail-setup. This whole exercise started because I have switched from dSpam to rspamd for spam-prevention. I had a whole forest of postfix-instances to fine tune things so spam-filtering was done before alias-expansion and after spf/dkim checks. Lots of other tweaks. I did have a working web-based quarantine though. Presently doing major demolition and converting to rmilter/rspamd, without quarantine. This means mailman gets to do the quarantine duty for spam to my lists.
I'm confident that the end-result will be less spaghetti-like, but I'm not there yet :-) . Also my rspamd is not fully trained and tested.
Another thought is just turn off admin_immed_notify, but of course that will also turn off notices for mail that might not be spam.
Done that, seems it did not "take" immediately. Spam flood has abated now, hopefully a few days to the next storm, by which time things will be in better shape.
On 03/31/2017 12:45 AM, Håkon Alstadheim via Mailman-Users wrote:
I have a list administrator who is on gmail. Forwarding held spam-messages to him does not work, since google rejects mail that has spam attached. Is it possible to send notification of pending actions *without* attaching the held message?
The notices sent upon holding a message when admin_immed_notify is Yes will always contain the held message.
However, the daily summary of held messages does not contain the messages themselves.
It would seem that if the immediate notification is "spam" and not received, that there wouldn't be any urgency to deal with that before the daily summary is sent anyway, so it doesn't seem to me that this is really a problem.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
participants (3)
-
Håkon Alstadheim -
Mark Sapiro -
Scott Neader