On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:31:19 -0500 (EST), Dan Mahoney, System Admin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just had a small problem. A virus was just sent to all the list members
which had spoofed the moderator's email address. No requires approval
message was sent, despite the fact that everyone (even
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 22:50:11 -0800, JC Dill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, I'm just speculating here... what if there's a virus/trojan out
that is able to take email that a user had already sent (email in the
sent folder), and resend it with a virus payload (in this case, the
beagle.ba virus
I would do the following:
Put Defaults.py back to it's original state.
Put the following in mm_cfg.py
MTA = Postfix
IMAGE_LOGOS = '/icons/'
DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'www.thedalzells.org'
DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'thedalzells.org'
VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
add_virtualhost('www.thedalzells.org')
The last could
Just a suggestion folks. I have been using mailman since it was the new
kid on the block and it is truly a fantastic package, but since series
2.1 at least once a week the VIRTUAL_HOSTS issue hits the users list.
Getting ready to move a bunch of list from 2.0.8 and 2.0.13 to new
servers
I have version 2.1.5 running on Solaris 8
Whenever I create a list the reply to address always changes the FQDN
side of the reply to to the mailing list address.
IE: for mailing list at @.com
original email has:-
from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
replyto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the email on the list
The link on http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/lists.html to
http://listowner.org/ is broken as that domain no longer (and has not for
some time) existed.
I have a listowner-side bug which (after reporting to the local server
administrator) I wanted to report on that list to see if anyone else
How hard is it to run mailman (including the bounce management thingie)
without running its web interface? We are moving our mail server to
another machine which will not run any web servers.
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
At 5:16 PM + 2005-01-28, Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley wrote:
The link on http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/lists.html to
http://listowner.org/ is broken as that domain no longer (and has not for
some time) existed.
See
At 12:23 PM -0500 2005-01-28, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
How hard is it to run mailman (including the bounce management
thingie) without running its web interface? We are moving our mail
server to another machine which will not run any web servers.
Mailman wasn't designed to be used that
At 10:50 PM -0800 2005-01-28, JC Dill wrote:
OK, I'm just speculating here... what if there's a virus/trojan out that
is able to take email that a user had already sent (email in the sent
folder), and resend it with a virus payload (in this case, the beagle.ba
virus above)? If it grabbed an
Erin Dalzell wrote:
That worked. I think the adding of the virtual hosts just allows the
list to be accessed through that URL. But by default it sets everything
to the default ones. That must be it.
Various things do use the VIRTUAL_HOSTS dictionary, but fix_url only
uses it if you specify the
simonb wrote:
I have version 2.1.5 running on Solaris 8
Whenever I create a list the reply to address always changes the FQDN
side of the reply to to the mailing list address.
IE: for mailing list at @.com
original email has:-
from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
replyto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the email
On 29/01/2005, at 1:23 AM, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
How hard is it to run mailman (including the bounce management
thingie) without running its web interface? We are moving our mail
server to another machine which will not run any web servers.
Another way of looking at the same problem is: why
Brad Knowles wrote:
At 10:50 PM -0800 2005-01-28, JC Dill wrote:
OK, I'm just speculating here... what if there's a virus/trojan out
that
is able to take email that a user had already sent (email in the sent
folder), and resend it with a virus payload (in this case, the
beagle.ba
virus
JC Dill wrote:
Most moderators use the web to approve email from *others*, but most of
the ones I know who are responsible for originating content for their
list use the approved header when they send the content to their list so
that they don't have to take an additional step of going to the
Mark Sapiro wrote:
Furthermore, if such a scenario has occurred or did occur in the
future, I suspect it would be just an unlucky accident. While I'm sure
that a clever worm creator could deliberately try to exploit this
potential vulnerability, I don't think the payoff would be sufficient
to
At 8:50 AM -0800 2005-01-29, JC Dill wrote:
Didn't I say that above?
Not that I saw, no. What I read of your message indicated that
the virus had infected a normal user and pulled a message out of
their sent folder, which would not have had the Approved: header.
Even then, most
At 10:23 AM -0800 2005-01-29, JC Dill wrote:
So I repeat my soapbox statement, don't allow attachments to your
mailing list. The downside is too great, sooner or later your list
WILL end up spreading a virus.
Absolutely. Can't argue with that.
--
Brad Knowles, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Those who
JC Dill wrote:
An attack of this type would not be just for list administrator posts.
It would also get past whitelist filters - because the message would
come from someone you have already received email from and are much more
likely to be accepting email from than some random stranger
Brad Knowles wrote:
At 8:50 AM -0800 2005-01-29, JC Dill wrote:
Didn't I say that above?
Not that I saw, no. What I read of your message indicated that
the virus had infected a normal user and pulled a message out of their
sent folder, which would not have had the Approved: header.
In my
I am trying to come up with a good starter filter_mime_types list. I
went through my /etc/mime.types and picked-out all of the top level
identifiers that I knew for sure that I didn't want... At least I think
I'm sure...
Anyway, here's my list:
image
application
audio
model
video
Have I made
In a flurry of recycled electrons, Mel Sojka wrote:
Just a suggestion folks. I have been using mailman since it was the new
kid on the block and it is truly a fantastic package, but since series
2.1 at least once a week the VIRTUAL_HOSTS issue hits the users list.
[...]
someone to create
Lauren Weinstein wrote:
Greetings. I'm evaluating Mailman (2.1.5) on some test lists, and
seem to be having a problem getting VERP enabled. I've set what
seem like reasonable values in mm_cfg.py (please see below).
However, envelope From addresses are still un-VERPed (e.g.
[EMAIL PROTECTED])
Mark Sapiro wrote:
I'm not a sendmail config expert, but I've used sendmail installations
where addresses of the form [EMAIL PROTECTED] get
delivered in exactly the same way as [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think
it works that way by default, See for example
On Jan 29, 2005, at 01:31, Christopher Adams wrote:
However, there is no entry in the post log and the message is never
delivered. This is a consistent problem for this particular person.
There are no error messages sent back to her or messages to me as the
mailman-owner.
I am just sitting
Mark Sapiro wrote:
Jeff Groves wrote:
So, would that never match scenario be a feature or a bug?
It would be a bug if it's true. As I said, I just looked quickly at the
code. I would have to verify actual behavior before drawing a final
conclusion.
My opinion is that Mailman should do the
26 matches
Mail list logo
