[Mailman-Users] Verifying posts

[Brad Knowles]

At 1:28 AM +0900 2006-01-30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

>  There was a thread about this in the fairly recent past, perhaps it
>  was on mailman-developers, though.  IIRC the consensus was "making
>  this more trouble than it's worth is not going to be easy".

	There is a FAQ entry on how to integrate Mailman with TMDA. 
IIRC, it is one of the longest, most extensive, and most complex FAQ 
entries.

>  In the interest of preempting a flamewar, let me note here that
>  challenge-response systems are a hot button for at least one of the
>  frequent posters on this list, and it would be a good idea to review
>  past threads and be prepared for those arguments.

	I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm pretty violently opposed 
to TMDA in general.

>  There was another thread on mailman-developers about a month ago
>  regarding the idea of weeding out unused addresses, although the
>  policy proposed there was significantly more aggressive.

	I'm not sure I would be opposed to a feature where posts to a 
list that result in moderation would require a confirmation before 
being displayed in the moderation queue (thus eliminating most spam 
where the sender's address is forged), but that's about as far as I 
would go.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad at stop.mail-abuse.org>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

     -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
     Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See <http://www.lopsa.org/>.