[Mailman-Users] Verifying posts
brad at stop.mail-abuse.org
Sun Jan 29 18:38:18 CET 2006
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
> 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
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/>.
More information about the Mailman-Users