[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Fri, 17 May 2002 12:52:56 -0400
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 06:15:07PM -0500, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> Dan> IMHO the mailing list should reject messages from nonsubscribers.
> Dan> I thought it already did.
> I agree, however I think the current stable version of Mailman (2.0.x)
> currently only allows the list admin to hold messages, which then have to be
> reviewed by a human.
It's not a software limitation; it's FSF policy. See:
It would seem that automated filtering is unacceptable to them,
whether content-based, open-relay detection, restricting posts to
subscribers, or whatever. But moderation is ok. So is providing
information to help subscribers to filter; they already add
headers like this to messages from open relays:
X-RBL-Warning: (relays.ordb.org) This mail was handled by an open relay
- please visit <http://ORDB.org/lookup/?host=126.96.36.199>
I guess their underlying goal is that posts may be rejected, but
only by a human, never by a program.
Info-cvs got really bad, probably a dozen spams a day. Even
then, the only option the GNU folks would consider was to make it
a moderated list -- RMS himself said so.
This was done a little over a month ago, with a loose policy that
basically just filters out spam from non-subscribers (i.e. only
non-subscribers' posts are held for approval in the first place).
Things have been a *lot* better since this kicked in.
> That said, I know there is some spam control. bug-automake sends me
> email periodically telling me to approve or reject some suspicious
> I don't have the password, though, so it is just accumulating.
Heh. The new info-cvs moderator said there were 250-odd messages
in the queue when he took it over, dating back as far as 2000.
| | /\
|-_|/ > Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont. address@hidden
| | /
Anyone who swims with the current will reach the big music steamship;
whoever swims against the current will perhaps reach the source.
- Paul Schneider-Esleben
- spam, christoph.wiedemann, 2002/05/13
- Re: spam, christoph.wiedemann, 2002/05/14
- RE: spam, Dan Kegel, 2002/05/14
- Re: spam, John Levon, 2002/05/14
- RE: spam, Skip Montanaro, 2002/05/16
- Re: spam,
Eric Siegerman <=