Re: [Mailman-Users] Why do my posts to own mailman list disappear.

[Paul Arenson/tokyoprogressive]

Thank you, Mark.

I looked in Cpanel and could see no directory starting with /usr/.  I have a 
reseller account and nangoku-jiyu-jin.net  is a 
subset of turnlefthostimg.org , but for now I am 
looking in the cpanel for nangoku-jiyu-jin.net . 
Again, no such directory in that CPanel.  I tried looking in root, etc. but do 
not see such a name as /usr/.

Then I figured out my FTP login and got in using the Transmit program.  I see a 
/usr/ folder at the end of a very long list of folders and files:
.bash.logout 
—
---
--
cpanel folder



public_ftp
public_html
ssl
tmp
usr
www

I click on usr and get Could not change directory to /usr
Server said can’t change directory to /usr: No such directory.
Error -125: remote chdir failed.

There is a cpanel  folder but that doesn’t seem to help. 

Am I looking in the wrong place?

Thanks, Paul








--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] Mailman's solution to DMARC makes List-Id useless

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Richard writes:

 > Below is why I think it's a bad idea.  Why can't we encode the
 > original email address in a comment or quoted token on the From:
 > line instead of jamming it onto Reply-To?

Because that makes it very inconvenient to reply to author.  On some
lists, that's a crucial feature.  For example, blind people require
excessive effort for cutting and pasting, but typically have access to
features that make selectively including addresses already present in
the headers very simple.  So it *must* be at least an option to
include the author as a real address in From or Reply-To, and I
believe it should be the default (see below).

 > the list.  From what I read of DMARC, it's the munging of the From:
 > line that is needed in order to have messages pass the DMARC
 > checks.

Actually, what happens is that the message *fails* the DMARC checks in
such a way that DMARC specifies the failure should be ignored, and the
message handled as though DMARC didn't even exist.

 > To me this makes sense -- the mailing list domain is sending the
 > message to the list and the appropriate domain checks need to be
 > made against the mailing list's domain, not the original author of
 > the mailing list message.

That's not a tenable interpretation.  There is a header for the
purpose of identifying the sender in your sense, its name is "Sender",
and the designers of DMARC deliberately rejected its use for this
purpose (for good reason).

As a pragmatic matter, mailing list domains rarely even have a _dmarc
DNS record, so such checks cannot be made effectively.

In any case, "From" is *defined* by RFC 5322 to be the *content
author*'s address for various purposes (such as identification and
reply).  It is also the preferred address for automatic reply to
author unless Reply-To is set.  The designers of Internet mail made
these decisions based on hard thought and long practical experience
because they make it possible for an MUA to handle both the common
cases and the edge cases smoothly.

The email RFCs do not envision *anybody but the original sender*
setting the From header, so one can't say anything with authority, but
my take is that if you insist on breaking the From header, you should
put the author in Reply-To so that receiving MUAs can find her address
and automatically reply to it.

 > What I'm not understanding is how DMARC is mandating that Reply-To:
 > go back to the original author,

It doesn't.  It's the basic Internet message standard (currently RFC
5322) that governs From and Reply-To.  As Mark explained, Mailman's
current behavior when From-munging is a delicate balancing act to
preserve as much of the "normal" operation of MUAs as possible without
triggering DMARC rejects.

DMARC p=reject gives list admins an unpleasant choice: (1) violate the
mail standards and suffer various degradations of service because
others in the mail system assume conformance (eg, your "wrong
duplicate" problem), (2) tell your p=reject users that their posts are
going to be rejected or discarded by many subscribers, or (3) stop
decorating posts with [List] tags or material prefixed and affixed to
the message body (so that the originator's DKIM signature will remain
valid and the DMARC checks will pass).

N.B. The tech staff from Yahoo! and AOL have acknowledged (on the
ietf-dmarc mailing list) that their employers are knowingly breaking
mailing lists (and other services) to address their security fiascos.
The designers of DMARC have always maintained that the Yahoo!/AOL use
case is abusive -- DMARC was designed to protect official mail to
customers sent on behalf of corporations by their employees, not the
general use mail of users with addresses at freemail providers.  In
other words, mailing lists just shouldn't receive mail from p=reject
domains, ever.  No problem -- until Yahoo! and AOL decided to *create*
one.

IMO, given those facts, posting from a Yahoo! or AOL address is just
plain rude.  (I can and do get away with banning their posts.  I wish
everybody could do that.)

 > and not the mailing list, as is the usualy convention: public
 > conversations from a mailing list cycle back to the mailing list by
 > default and only fork into a private conversation when specifically
 > requested.

The "usual convention" (of munging Reply-To) violates the mail RFCs
and breaks interoperability, and should be entirely unnecessary now
that we've had List-Post for more than a decade.  Consider an MUA
whose default reply function looks in Reply-To first, then in
List-Post, then in From.  Why doesn't everybody's do that?  It's
trivial to implement. :-(

 > What's happening now is that people are doing "reply to all" in
 > order to get the mailing list included, which makes *me* the
 > recipient of their reply and the mailing list cc'ed.

As Mark points out, the first thing to do is to make sure you set
dmarc_moderation_action, not from_is_list.  Then only Yahoo! and AOL
posters are likely to cause pain.  Hopefully they are few

Re: [Mailman-Users] Archive page not showing dates properly

[Mark Sapiro]

On 08/21/2015 02:29 AM, Peter Wetz wrote:
> On the archive page of my mailman list the dates are not showing up
> properly. It looks like this: http://i.imgur.com/IrmWnie.png
> 
> As you can see, instead of the date a string "%(date)s" is shown. It is
> also worth noting, that it already worked properly. However, suddenly (at
> least I cannot state when exactly) it stopped working and since then dates
> are shown as seen in the screenshot.


The standard Mailman archidxentry.html template does not have a %(date)s
substitution in it. Presumably, your installation/list has a custom
version of this template () which adds
the %(date)s substitution and along with this, modifications to
Mailman/Archiver/HyperArch.py to add a 'date' entry to the interpolation
dictionary for this template, and also presumably, some Mailman upgrade
removed the modification to HyperArch.py.


> How can I fix this problem?


Replace the current Mailman/Archiver/HyperArch.py with the one that was
there when it worked, or in the definition of write_index_entry at about
line 1073 where you see

d = {
'filename': urllib.quote(article.filename),
'subject':  subject,
'sequence': article.sequence,
'author':   author
}

change it to

d = {
'filename': urllib.quote(article.filename),
'subject':  subject,
'sequence': article.sequence,
'date': article.datestr,
'author':   author
}

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman's solution to DMARC makes List-Id useless

[Mark Sapiro]

On 08/20/2015 10:13 AM, Richard wrote:
> 
> However, what is really annoying is that it takes the original From:
> line and puts it on the Reply-To: line and there's no way to turn this
> off.
> 
> I can't seem to find any explanation of why anyone thinks this is a
> good idea.  Maybe someone here can explain it to me.


It is there to make a "reply" and "reply-all" actions on posts with
munged From: be as consistent as possible with the same action on a
non-munged post, and to expose the poster's address in a header which is
normally displayed by MUAs.


> Below is why I think it's a bad idea.  Why can't we encode the original
> email address in a comment or quoted token on the From: line instead of
> jamming it onto Reply-To?
> 
> This is how I'm seeing mailing list messages now:
> 
>   To: Hal Finkel 
>   cc: cfe-...@lists.llvm.org,
>   Commit Messages and Patches for LLVM 
> From: Lang Hames via cfe-dev 
> Reply-To: Lang Hames 
> 
> The reply-to is going to the sender instead of the list, which is
> making people cc the mailing list in order to get things to go back to
> the list.


And without munging, the same post would be

>   To: Hal Finkel 
>   cc: cfe-...@lists.llvm.org,
>   Commit Messages and Patches for LLVM

> From: Lang Hames 

and reply would still go to the sender in From:


> From what I read of DMARC, it's the munging of the From:
> line that is needed in order to have messages pass the DMARC checks.
> To me this makes sense -- the mailing list domain is sending the message
> to the list and the appropriate domain checks need to be made against
> the mailing list's domain, not the original author of the mailing list
> message.


And if you used dmarc_moderation_action instead of from_is_list to munge
the from, only posts From: domains which publish DMARC reject (or
optionally, quarantine) policies would be munged. The policy for
gmail.com in 'none'.


> What I'm not understanding is how DMARC is mandating that Reply-To: go
> back to the original author, and not the mailing list, as is the
> usualy convention: public conversations from a mailing list cycle back
> to the mailing list by default and only fork into a private
> conversation when specifically requested.


If you want this behavior, set the list's reply_goes_to_list to "This
list", then with current Mailman, the above becomes

>   To: Hal Finkel 
>   cc: cfe-...@lists.llvm.org,
>   Commit Messages and Patches for LLVM
,
>   Lang Hames 
> From: Lang Hames via cfe-dev 
> Reply-To: 

Whether or not to munge Reply-To: to the list address is controversial
and has been argued and flamed multiple times for years. See
.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to discard messages from just a few list members?

[Mark Sapiro]

On 08/21/2015 01:28 AM, Ulf Dunkel wrote:
> 
> In "Privacy options > Sender filters", I see many options to treat
> postings from non-member addresses. But I don't find a way to discard
> posting from defined list members automatically, without dropping them
> from the list.
> 
> Is there any such option that I have overseen?


Set the members moderated and set member_moderation_action to Discard.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] Mailman's solution to DMARC makes List-Id useless

[Richard]

Hi,

I'm on a mailing list that recently switched the mailman DMARC setting
to "Munge from".  IMO, the munging of the From: line is fine as far as
I'm concerned and I see how that fixes the DMARC problem.

However, what is really annoying is that it takes the original From:
line and puts it on the Reply-To: line and there's no way to turn this
off.

I can't seem to find any explanation of why anyone thinks this is a
good idea.  Maybe someone here can explain it to me.

Below is why I think it's a bad idea.  Why can't we encode the original
email address in a comment or quoted token on the From: line instead of
jamming it onto Reply-To?

This is how I'm seeing mailing list messages now:

  To: Hal Finkel 
  cc: cfe-...@lists.llvm.org,
  Commit Messages and Patches for LLVM 
From: Lang Hames via cfe-dev 
Reply-To: Lang Hames 

The reply-to is going to the sender instead of the list, which is
making people cc the mailing list in order to get things to go back to
the list.  From what I read of DMARC, it's the munging of the From:
line that is needed in order to have messages pass the DMARC checks.
To me this makes sense -- the mailing list domain is sending the message
to the list and the appropriate domain checks need to be made against
the mailing list's domain, not the original author of the mailing list
message.

What I'm not understanding is how DMARC is mandating that Reply-To: go
back to the original author, and not the mailing list, as is the
usualy convention: public conversations from a mailing list cycle back
to the mailing list by default and only fork into a private
conversation when specifically requested.

What's happening now is that people are doing "reply to all" in order
to get the mailing list included, which makes *me* the recipient of
their reply and the mailing list cc'ed.  Then the mailing list
software notices that the message was sent *to* an address already on
the mailing list, so it doesn't send me a second copy of the message.

This means that every time someone replies to my messages on the
mailing list, and all subsequent replies in the thread because
everyone else will do reply-to-all as well, I'll be getting all these
private messages that are actually copies of the public messages but
I won't be getting the public messages.

This makes the entire List-Id field useless because none of these
replies to threads in which I participate will come back to me through
the mailing list, but instead as private copies of public messages
sent to the mailing list.  As a result, it basically screws up all
mailing list filtering -- which was the whole point of the list-id
field.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book 
 The Computer Graphics Museum 
 The Terminals Wiki 
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) 
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] Archive page not showing dates properly

[Peter Wetz]

On the archive page of my mailman list the dates are not showing up
properly. It looks like this: http://i.imgur.com/IrmWnie.png

As you can see, instead of the date a string "%(date)s" is shown. It is
also worth noting, that it already worked properly. However, suddenly (at
least I cannot state when exactly) it stopped working and since then dates
are shown as seen in the screenshot.

The archives are generated with Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition).

How can I fix this problem?

Thanks and best,
Peter
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to discard messages from just a few list members?

[Richard Damon]

On 8/21/15 4:28 AM, Ulf Dunkel wrote:

I am running some moderated mailing lists (for newsletters) where only I
myself should be able to send messages. Every now and then some of my
list members get trapped in a spam bulk mail and repeat this spam even
to my lists.

In "Privacy options > Sender filters", I see many options to treat
postings from non-member addresses. But I don't find a way to discard
posting from defined list members automatically, without dropping them
from the list.

Is there any such option that I have overseen?

I am currently running Mailman 2.1.16.

---Ulf Dunkel

Just setup a filter ( Privacy  > SPAM Filters ) to detect messages From: 
them and set the disposition to discard.


--
Richard Damon

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] How to discard messages from just a few list members?

[Ulf Dunkel]

I am running some moderated mailing lists (for newsletters) where only I
myself should be able to send messages. Every now and then some of my
list members get trapped in a spam bulk mail and repeat this spam even
to my lists.

In "Privacy options > Sender filters", I see many options to treat
postings from non-member addresses. But I don't find a way to discard
posting from defined list members automatically, without dropping them
from the list.

Is there any such option that I have overseen?

I am currently running Mailman 2.1.16.

---Ulf Dunkel
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org