From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 1 10:08:08 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from S1.cableone.net (smtp1.cableone.net [24.116.0.227]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CC6D32C2C4 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:07:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.sonny.com (unverified [24.116.58.25]) by S1.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S1) with ESMTP id 11757789 for multiple; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 22:12:00 -0700 Received: from sonny.org (dad.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa [192.168.1.60] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.sonny.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j1S55uaU007504 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:06:04 -0600 Message-ID: <4222A6A4.5020401@sonny.org> Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:05:40 -0600 From: Daniel Liston User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barry Koopersmith Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: How to control order of delivery References: <4218B06F.3030801@optonline.net> In-Reply-To: <4218B06F.3030801@optonline.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IP-stats: Incoming Outgoing Last 5, First 120, in=107, out=26, spam=0 Known=true X-External-IP: 24.116.58.25 X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse@cableone.net X-Archive-Number: 200503/1 X-Sequence-Number: 4991 Sorry for the long delay. Working 20 hours a day lately. Short answer, yes (confirmed). Dan Liston Barry Koopersmith wrote: > Yes, my web hosting provider uses "sendmail" with "majordomo" and I > found the file located at "/etc/aliases". I pasted the contents of that > file below. > > Please confirm that the line should be modified to look as follows (all > on a single line): > > lourds_announcements: "|/usr/lib/majordomo/wrapper resend -l > lourds_announcements -h irbl.net > lourds_announcements-outgoing,lourds@lourdsmusic.com,bkoopers@optonline.net" > > > I do not have rights to modify any "system" file so I submit a request > to my web hosting provider's technical support people and they make the > change for me. I noticed that the file has a comment at the top that > states to run "newaliases" after modifying the "aliases" file. They > probably already know that but am I correct that I should specifically > ask them to run it after the change (just in case they did not know)? > > Am I correct that if I will leave those two email addresses in the main > mailing list, after this change, those two email addresses should get > the email very quickly after an email is sent to the list and a second > copy will arrive the usual 30 minutes later? If I am correct, if that > happens (getting 2 emails 30 minutes apart), then I know the change was > done correctly and I can then remove those two email addresses from the > main list? > > Thanks again for all your assistance. > > ****************************************************************** > # > # @(#)aliases 8.2 (Berkeley) 3/5/94 > # > # Aliases in this file will NOT be expanded in the header from > # Mail, but WILL be visible over networks or from /bin/mail. > # > # >>>>>>>>>> The program "newaliases" must be run after > # >> NOTE >> this file is updated for any changes to > # >>>>>>>>>> show through to sendmail. > # > > # Basic system aliases -- these MUST be present. > MAILER-DAEMON: postmaster > postmaster: root > site_blackhole: /dev/null > > root: bkoopersmith > catch-all: bkoopersmith > > majordomo: "|/usr/lib/majordomo/wrapper majordomo" > lourds_announcements: "|/usr/lib/majordomo/wrapper resend -l > lourds_announcements -h irbl.net lourds_announcements-outgoing" > lourds_announcements-outgoing: > :include:/var/lib/majordomo/lists/lourds_announcements > lourds_announcements-list: > :include:/var/lib/majordomo/lists/lourds_announcements > owner-lourds_announcements: bkoopers@optonline.net > lourds_announcements-owner: bkoopers@optonline.net > lourds_announcements-approval: bkoopers@optonline.net > lourds_announcements-request: "|/usr/lib/majordomo/wrapper majordomo -l > lourds_announcements" > ****************************************************************** > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: How to control order of delivery > Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 04:22:20 -0600 > From: Daniel Liston > To: Barry Koopersmith > CC: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com > > On a machine that hosts domains, the file could be called anything > and located anywhere. Look for /etc/aliases or /etc/mail/aliases > as a flat text file. If your MTA is other than sendmail, that hint > might not be worth the electrons that sent it either. You edit the > file with your favorite text editor like vi, emacs, or pico. > > The line you want to replace should look something like this; > lourds_announcements: "|/usr/lib/majordomo/wrapper resend -l > lourds_announcements lourds_announcements-list,nobody" > > when you modify it, it should look like this; > lourds_announcements: "|/usr/lib/majordomo/wrapper resend -l > lourds_announcements > lourds_announcements-list,lourds@lourdsmusic.com,bkoopers@optonline.net" > > Depending on the location for the majordomo wrapper, the path above > could be different. The example I used is from a redhat installation. > Also, your outgoing alias might be named different. The example I > used "lourds_announcements-list" might have a different extension to > replace "list" with "outgoing", "20050220", or any random string. > > Dan Liston > > PS. Both of the examples above are on a single line, just in case > this email gets long lines wrapped into multiple lines. > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: How to control order of delivery > Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:36:03 -0500 > From: Barry Koopersmith > To: Daniel Liston > CC: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com > > Thank you for your response. > > I am new to using mailing lists. I bought the "Managing Mailing Lists" > by Alan Schwartz book but I cannot figure out how to implement your > suggestion. > > I only have two email addresses that I want to speed up delivery for. > The two addresses are lourds@lourdsmusic.com and bkoopers@optonline.net. > The mailing list name is lourds_announcements. Please tell me the name > of the file and the exact command line that I would need to insert (and > where in the file it should be placed) based on the above values. > > Thanks for your help. > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: How to control order of delivery > Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 12:41:54 -0600 > From: Daniel Liston > To: Barry Koopersmith > CC: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com > > If this is just for one or two addresses, you might speed things along > considerably by adding the addresses directly to the aliases file. > > listname: "/usr/lib/majordomo/wrapper resend -l listname > listname-outgoing,addr1,addr2" > or > listname-outgoing: addr1,addr2,:include:/path-to/lists/listname > > Dan Liston > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: How to control order of delivery > Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 00:24:12 -0500 > From: Barry Koopersmith > To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com > > I have a mailing list of about 1400 addresses (including my address). > When an email is posted to the list, I get my copy from 30 to 45 minutes > later. I tried move my email address to the top of the list of names but > I still did not receive my copy quickly. > > Does the Majordomo software send out the emails in alphabetical order of > the addresses (regardless of the order in the address list file) or what > controls the order of delivery.? > > Is there a way to configure the distribution so that two particular > addresses get the emails first (and hopefully quickly)? > > Thanks to anyone who can help me out. > From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 1 10:22:15 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from web30905.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30905.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.200.158]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 08BCE32C1D3 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:22:14 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 1713 invoked by uid 60001); 1 Mar 2005 18:22:14 -0000 Message-ID: <20050301182214.1711.qmail@web30905.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [24.21.184.24] by web30905.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:22:14 PST Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:22:14 -0800 (PST) From: Ed Lazor Subject: Reply to To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1929335297-1109701334=:99870" X-Archive-Number: 200503/2 X-Sequence-Number: 4992 --0-1929335297-1109701334=:99870 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hello, I tried searching the archives and didn't see anything - sorry if I'm asking a dumb question here... I set up a mailing list. When people reply to email received through the list, the message goes back to the list, instead of the person who wrote the original message. My members have complained a lot and have asked me to change the mailing list so that replies go to the person rather than to the entire list. Is this possible? And, if so, how can I accomplish it? thanks, Ed --0-1929335297-1109701334=:99870 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Hello,
 
I tried searching the archives and didn't see anything - sorry if I'm asking a dumb question here...
 
I set up a mailing list.  When people reply to email received through the list, the message goes back to the list, instead of the person who wrote the original message.  My members have complained a lot and have asked me to change the mailing list so that replies go to the person rather than to the entire list.
 
Is this possible?  And, if so, how can I accomplish it?
 
thanks,
 
Ed
 
--0-1929335297-1109701334=:99870-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 1 10:39:51 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts16.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.4]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7903632C1F1 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:39:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from acer.sympatico.ca ([65.95.169.24]) by tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20050301183947.YPI1836.tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net@acer.sympatico.ca> for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 13:39:47 -0500 Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.0.20050301133255.04462110@pop6.sympatico.ca> X-Sender: b1wudu74@pop6.sympatico.ca X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:39:35 -0500 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com From: Frank Bax Subject: Re: Reply to In-Reply-To: <20050301182214.1711.qmail@web30905.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200503/3 X-Sequence-Number: 4993 At 01:22 PM 3/1/05, Ed Lazor wrote: >Hello, > >I tried searching the archives and didn't see anything - sorry if I'm >asking a dumb question here... > >I set up a mailing list. When people reply to email received through the >list, the message goes back to the list, instead of the person who wrote >the original message. My members have complained a lot and have asked me >to change the mailing list so that replies go to the person rather than to >the entire list. > >Is this possible? And, if so, how can I accomplish it? You should have searched for "reply_to", but be warned ... it might also be a problem with the email client where clicking "reply" does not use the expected header to get the reply address. As I understand it, "reply_to" is typically used when you "want" to reply to list. Without a "reply_to" header, the email client is expected to reply to the email address in "From" header. If the email client is "broken", nothing you do on server will produce desired results. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 2 06:23:35 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net (sccrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.202.64]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E993232C205 for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 06:23:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from ken (c-67-180-233-13.client.comcast.net[67.180.233.13]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with SMTP id <2005030214233401600sc1nge>; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 14:23:34 +0000 Message-ID: <001c01c51f33$4ea20000$0a02a8c0@ken> From: "Kenneth B. Harwood" To: Subject: Majordomo on a commercial web hosting service Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 06:22:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0019_01C51EF0.403274C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Archive-Number: 200503/4 X-Sequence-Number: 4994 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C51EF0.403274C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable i want to run a ListServer behind my website. my Web Hosting Service (GoDa= ddy) does not offer Majordomo (or anything like it). under my "Deluxe" lev= el of service contract, GoDaddy will allow me to upload (and execute live) = Perl scripts. do you think that is sufficient to allow me to get Majordomo= running in GoDaddy's server? one of the thing: under the terms of my contract i do not have linux shell = or Admin access to GoDaddy's server. this almost certainly meansthat i wo= uld not be allowed to compile Majordomo's single C-coded security module (m= entioned in your FAQ) on their virtual host.=20=20 should i not be able to get Majordomo running on GoDaddy that would not be = such a terrible thing. Majordomo is probably more than i need but too much= of a good thing never hurt anyone. thank you. - kenneth harwood reno, nevada ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C51EF0.403274C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
i want to run a ListServer behind my=20 website.  my Web Hosting Service (GoDaddy) does not offer=20 Majordomo (or anything like it).  under my "Deluxe" level of serv= ice=20 contract, GoDaddy will allow me to upload (and execute live) Perl= =20 scripts.  do you think that is sufficient to allow me to get Majordomo= =20 running in GoDaddy's server?
 
one of the thing: under the terms of my = contract=20 i do not have linux shell or= =20 Admin access to GoDaddy's server.  this almost certa= inly=20 meansthat  i would not be allowed to compile Majordomo's single C-code= d=20 security module (mentioned in your FAQ) on their virtual=20 host.  
 
should i not be able to get Majordomo ru= nning on=20 GoDaddy that would not be such a terrible thing.  Majordomo i= s=20 probably more than i need but too much of a good thing never hurt=20 anyone.
 
thank you.
 
 - kenneth harwood
   reno,=20 nevada
------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C51EF0.403274C0-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 2 07:29:59 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts25.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.188]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28ACB32C346 for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 07:29:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from acer.sympatico.ca ([65.95.169.24]) by tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20050302152953.GNEP1567.tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net@acer.sympatico.ca> for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:29:53 -0500 Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.0.20050302102751.04675970@pop6.sympatico.ca> X-Sender: b1wudu74@pop6.sympatico.ca X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 10:29:35 -0500 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com From: Frank Bax Subject: Re: Majordomo on a commercial web hosting service In-Reply-To: <001c01c51f33$4ea20000$0a02a8c0@ken> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200503/5 X-Sequence-Number: 4995 At 09:22 AM 3/2/05, Kenneth B. Harwood wrote: >i want to run a ListServer behind my website. my Web Hosting Service >(GoDaddy) does not offer Majordomo (or anything like it). under my >"Deluxe" level of service contract, GoDaddy will allow me to upload (and >execute live) Perl scripts. do you think that is sufficient to allow me >to get Majordomo running in GoDaddy's server? No. System config files need to be updated so that incoming email is directed to those scripts. Frank From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 3 07:21:52 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from S1.cableone.net (smtp1.cableone.net [24.116.0.227]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A332E32C1A2 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 07:21:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.sonny.com (unverified [24.116.58.25]) by S1.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S1) with ESMTP id 12149052 for multiple; Thu, 03 Mar 2005 08:22:25 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.134] (a62fw.adminsrvcs.net [199.180.4.101]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.sonny.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j23FLBaU029236 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 09:21:30 -0600 Message-ID: <42272B64.9090803@sonny.org> Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 09:21:08 -0600 From: Daniel Liston User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041127) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Kenneth B. Harwood" Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Majordomo on a commercial web hosting service References: <001c01c51f33$4ea20000$0a02a8c0@ken> In-Reply-To: <001c01c51f33$4ea20000$0a02a8c0@ken> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IP-stats: Incoming Outgoing Last 1, First 124, in=111, out=26, spam=0 Known=true X-External-IP: 24.116.58.25 X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse@cableone.net X-Archive-Number: 200503/6 X-Sequence-Number: 4996 Web hosting is not the same as mail hosting (is it?). For majordomo, you need shell or at least editor access to make modifications to the /etc/aliases file as you create your mailing list(s). With ftp access, you might be able to find work-arounds, but each time you send/modify this file, a shell command must be executed to make the changes active. I doubt very highly that you will be able to run majordomo on GoDaddy based on the information you provided. Dan Liston Kenneth B. Harwood wrote: > i want to run a ListServer behind my website. my Web Hosting Service > (GoDaddy) does not offer Majordomo (or anything like it). under my > "Deluxe" level of service contract, GoDaddy will allow me to upload > (and execute live) Perl scripts. do you think that is sufficient to > allow me to get Majordomo running in GoDaddy's server? > > one of the thing: under the terms of my contract i do not have linux > shell or Admin access to GoDaddy's server. this almost certainly > meansthat i would not be allowed to compile Majordomo's single > C-coded security module (mentioned in your FAQ) on their virtual host. > > should i not be able to get Majordomo running on GoDaddy that would > not be such a terrible thing. Majordomo is probably more than i need > but too much of a good thing never hurt anyone. > > thank you. > > - kenneth harwood > reno, nevada From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 7 07:45:27 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mxfep01.bredband.com (mxfep01.bredband.com [195.54.107.70]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0FB932C309 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 07:45:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from pcgoran ([213.115.135.232] [213.115.135.232]) by mxfep01.bredband.com with SMTP id <20050307154524.DCRG429.mxfep01.bredband.com@pcgoran> for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 16:45:24 +0100 Message-ID: <005b01c5232c$b03cb970$e88773d5@pcgoran> From: "Goran Tornqvist" To: Subject: Subject is appended (RE: RE: RE) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 16:45:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0058_01C52335.11CA5A00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Archive-Number: 200503/7 X-Sequence-Number: 4997 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C52335.11CA5A00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I have the following problem. Messages posted to my list looks like this (subject): RE: (listname) Re: (listname) subject. (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) (lis= tname) subject Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: subject Is there any was resolve this? I just want the subject to be like: RE: (listname) subject or (listname) RE: subject Any id=E9as? Best Regards Goran ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C52335.11CA5A00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
I have the following problem.
Messages posted to my list looks like this= =20 (subject):
 
RE: (listname) Re: (listname)=20 subject.

(listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: (listname) R= e:=20 (listname) (listname) subject

Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: subject

Is there any was resolve this? I just= want the=20 subject to be like:

RE: (listname) subject

or

(listname) RE: subject

Any id=E9as?

Best Regards

Goran

------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C52335.11CA5A00-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 9 04:59:20 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from eagle.netwrx1.com (adsl-68-248-203-41.dsl.milwwi.ameritech.net [68.248.203.41]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FC7732C43E for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 04:59:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from [68.248.203.45] (helo=NOTEBOOK-LOCAL.netwrx1.com) by eagle.netwrx1.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1D90mE-0007qh-00 for majordomo-users@greatcircle.com; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 06:59:02 -0600 From: George R.Kasica To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Blocking mail identified as Spam by Spam Assassin 3.0.2 Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 06:59:02 -0600 Organization: Netwrx Consulting Inc. Reply-To: georgek@netwrx1.com Message-ID: <6fst21lu4ctj3b5imcccbuhgga7lfic1ag@4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanner: exiscan *1D90mE-0007qh-00*rrgeAoRoPgk* (Netwrx Consulting Inc., Jackson, WI USA) X-Archive-Number: 200503/8 X-Sequence-Number: 4998 Hello: I'm running a spam checker here (SpamAssassin 3.0.2) along with majordomo 1.94.5 and am wondering how I can get the major do disallow postings that are flagged as spam when they arrive but before they hit majordomo. I'm guessing its through Taboo Headers but I don't know what the regex should look like as I've never fiddled with those settings....Here are the things it will do to a subject and added headers that might work, I'm thinking subject and X-Spam-Flag: YES are good choices, but I don't know what the exclusions should look like. Can someone help out with that syntax from the below sample? Subject: ***** SPAM ***** JFDEMT, there's a message in your box! X-Spam-Flag: YES George ===[George R. Kasica]=== +1 262 677 0766 President +1 206 374 6482 FAX Netwrx Consulting Inc. Jackson, WI USA http://www.netwrx1.com georgek@netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 9 06:05:24 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from wrenkasky.com (esson.net [216.102.129.43]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F90132C43F for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 06:05:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from www.esson.net (IDENT:bWR1vbwQnp/IVKnfUEAPp8RuXz/nMXMj@www.esson.net [10.10.10.4]) by wrenkasky.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j29E5LJk030898 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NOT); Wed, 9 Mar 2005 06:05:21 -0800 Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 06:05:21 -0800 (PST) From: Ed Kasky X-X-Sender: ed@yoda2.wrenkasky.com To: "George R.Kasica" Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Blocking mail identified as Spam by Spam Assassin 3.0.2 In-Reply-To: <6fst21lu4ctj3b5imcccbuhgga7lfic1ag@4ax.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Received-SPF: pass (yoda2.wrenkasky.com: domain of ed@esson.net designates 10.10.10.4 as permitted sender) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.83/757/Tue Mar 8 15:14:36 2005 on yoda2.wrenkasky.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Archive-Number: 200503/9 X-Sequence-Number: 4999 I suggest you use a procmail recipe to move the mail to a temporary folder and then monitor that mail folder to ensure that it is spam. It is never good practice to automatically delete tagged mail until you verify it as no spam software is 100% accurate. Here's one that works for me. Replace /path/to/spam/folder with the correct path for your setup. :0: * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes /path/to/spam/folder On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, George R.Kasica wrote: > Hello: > > I'm running a spam checker here (SpamAssassin 3.0.2) along with > majordomo 1.94.5 and am wondering how I can get the major do disallow > postings that are flagged as spam when they arrive but before they hit > majordomo. I'm guessing its through Taboo Headers but I don't know > what the regex should look like as I've never fiddled with those > settings....Here are the things it will do to a subject and added > headers that might work, I'm thinking subject and X-Spam-Flag: YES are > good choices, but I don't know what the exclusions should look like. > > Can someone help out with that syntax from the below sample? > > Subject: ***** SPAM ***** JFDEMT, there's a message in your box! > X-Spam-Flag: YES > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Randomly generated quote: He who laughs last, thinks slowest. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 9 11:42:06 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM Received: from wrenkasky.com (esson.net [216.102.129.43]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE87732C3F6 for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:41:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from KASKY.esson.net (kasky.priority.usc.edu [128.125.63.85]) (authenticated bits=0) by wrenkasky.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j29Jfv0r006582 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:41:58 -0800 Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20050309113949.01c1d600@mail.esson.net> X-Sender: ed@mail.esson.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:41:53 -0800 To: georgek@netwrx1.com From: Ed Kasky Subject: Re: Blocking mail identified as Spam by Spam Assassin 3.0.2 Cc: majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: References: <6fst21lu4ctj3b5imcccbuhgga7lfic1ag@4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Received-SPF: pass (wrenkasky.com: 128.125.63.85 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.83/760/Wed Mar 9 09:12:01 2005 on yoda2.wrenkasky.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Archive-Number: 200503/10 X-Sequence-Number: 5000 I just sort of figured you were using sendmail - not sure how you would go about doing this with Exim... Ed ~~~~~~~~~ Randomly Generated Quote (16 of 474): "Always bear in mind that your own resolution to success is more important than any other one thing." --Abraham Lincoln At 07:26 AM Wednesday, 3/9/2005, you wrote -=> >Ed: > >Not to sound dumb, but I'm not a procmail guru at all...where and how >would I implement this? FWIW I'm running Exim 3.36m SpamAssAssin 3.0.2 >and MD 1.94.5 > >George > > >On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 06:05:21 -0800 (PST), you wrote: > > >I suggest you use a procmail recipe to move the mail to a temporary folder > >and then monitor that m ail folder to ensure that it is spam. It is > >never good practice to automatically delete tagged mail until you > >verify it as no spam software is 100% accurate. Here's one that works > >for me. Replace /path/to/spam/folder with the correct path for your > >setup. > > > >:0: > >* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes > >/path/to/spam/folder > > > >On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, George R.Kasica wrote: > > > >> Hello: > >> > >> I'm running a spam checker here (SpamAssassin 3.0.2) along with > >> majordomo 1.94.5 and am wondering how I can get the major do disallow > >> postings that are flagged as spam when they arrive but before they hit > >> majordomo. I'm guessing its through Taboo Headers but I don't know > >> what the regex should look like as I've never fiddled with those > >> settings....Here are the things it will do to a subject and added > >> headers that might work, I'm thinking subject and X-Spam-Flag: YES are > >> good choices, but I don't know what the exclusions should look like. > >> > >> Can someone help out with that syntax from the below sample? > >> > >> Subject: ***** SPAM ***** JFDEMT, there's a message in your box! > >> X-Spam-Flag: YES From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 9 14:14:33 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from S1.cableone.net (smtp1.cableone.net [24.116.0.227]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21E0632C2D1 for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 14:14:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.sonny.com (unverified [24.116.58.25]) by S1.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S1) with ESMTP id 12830310 for multiple; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 15:16:22 -0700 Received: from sonny.org (dad.liston.nu [192.168.1.60]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.sonny.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j29ME28x027562 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 9 Mar 2005 16:14:05 -0600 Message-ID: <422F75A0.6050509@sonny.org> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:16:00 -0600 From: Daniel Liston User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: georgek@netwrx1.com, majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Blocking mail identified as Spam by Spam Assassin 3.0.2 References: <6fst21lu4ctj3b5imcccbuhgga7lfic1ag@4ax.com> <6.0.0.22.2.20050309113949.01c1d600@mail.esson.net> In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.2.20050309113949.01c1d600@mail.esson.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IP-stats: Incoming Outgoing Last 1, First 130, in=113, out=27, spam=0 Known=true X-External-IP: 24.116.58.25 X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse@cableone.net X-Archive-Number: 200503/11 X-Sequence-Number: 5001 You should be able to do this in the /etc/majordomo.cf file. Here are the default filters; # taboo headers to catch # $global_taboo_headers = <<'END'; /^subject: ndn: /i /^subject:\s*RCPT:/i /^subject:\s*Delivery Confirmation\b/i /^subject:\s*NON-DELIVERY of:/i /^subject:\s*Undeliverable Message\b/i /^subject:\s*Receipt Confirmation\b/i /^subject:\s*Failed mail\b/i /^subject:\s*Returned mail\b/i /^subject:\s*unable to deliver mail\b/i /^subject:\s.*\baway from my mail\b/i /^subject:\s*Autoreply/i END Because of the way I add/use headers in my own lists, I add these to the global taboo list too; /^X-ApprovalRequired:/i /^X-Mailing-?List:/i /^X-BeenThere:/i /^X-Loop:/i /^Return-Path: /i To do what you are asking about spamassassin, something like these might be helpful; /^X-Spam-Status: Yes/i /^X-Spam-Flag: YES/i /^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*/i You might replace the star above with whatever character is being used to "score" your spam. In the case of non-wildcard characters, you do not need the backslash escapes either. Lastly, I only put 6 stars on the line. My own filters consider mail to be spam at 4.5, YMMV. Just make sure to do all your additions to the global taboo headers before the "END" line, and do not leave any lines blank between $global_taboo_headers = <<'END'; and END Dan Liston Ed Kasky wrote: > I just sort of figured you were using sendmail - not sure how you would > go about doing this with Exim... > > Ed > ~~~~~~~~~ > Randomly Generated Quote (16 of 474): > "Always bear in mind that your own resolution to success is more > important than any other one thing." --Abraham Lincoln > > At 07:26 AM Wednesday, 3/9/2005, you wrote -=> > >> Ed: >> >> Not to sound dumb, but I'm not a procmail guru at all...where and how >> would I implement this? FWIW I'm running Exim 3.36m SpamAssAssin 3.0.2 >> and MD 1.94.5 >> >> George >> >> >On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 06:05:21 -0800 (PST), you wrote: >> >> >I suggest you use a procmail recipe to move the mail to a temporary >> folder >> >and then monitor that m ail folder to ensure that it is spam. >> It is >> >never good practice to automatically delete tagged mail until you >> >verify it as no spam software is 100% accurate. Here's one that works >> >for me. Replace /path/to/spam/folder with the correct path for your >> >setup. >> > >> >:0: >> >* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes >> >/path/to/spam/folder >> > >> >On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, George R.Kasica wrote: >> > >> >> Hello: >> >> >> >> I'm running a spam checker here (SpamAssassin 3.0.2) along with >> >> majordomo 1.94.5 and am wondering how I can get the major do disallow >> >> postings that are flagged as spam when they arrive but before they hit >> >> majordomo. I'm guessing its through Taboo Headers but I don't know >> >> what the regex should look like as I've never fiddled with those >> >> settings....Here are the things it will do to a subject and added >> >> headers that might work, I'm thinking subject and X-Spam-Flag: YES are >> >> good choices, but I don't know what the exclusions should look like. >> >> >> >> Can someone help out with that syntax from the below sample? >> >> >> >> Subject: ***** SPAM ***** JFDEMT, there's a message in your box! >> >> X-Spam-Flag: YES From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Mar 11 08:19:47 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM Received: from defiant.emacolet.com (defiant.emacolet.com [24.106.189.230]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 294FC32C4A9 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:19:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from webmail.emacolet.com (mail.emacolet.com [10.21.9.59]) by defiant.emacolet.com (8.12.10/8.12.8) with SMTP id j2BGJeeM020644 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:19:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from static-68-239-83-249.res.east.verizon.net ([68.239.83.249]) (SquirrelMail authenticated user ppbenac@emacolet.com); by webmail.emacolet.com with HTTP; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:19:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1060.68.239.83.249.1110557981.squirrel@68.239.83.249> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:19:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: Majordomo and ESOsoft Enhancements From: "Peter P. Benac" To: majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM Reply-To: ppbenac@emacolet.com User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.3 [CVS] X-Mailer: SquirrelMail/1.4.3 [CVS] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.42 X-Archive-Number: 200503/12 X-Sequence-Number: 5002 Greetings, Does anyone have a copy of ESo Soft enhancements to Majordomo 1.94.5? If not, does anyone have similar enhancements to Majordomo? Regards, Pete ---- Peter P. Benac, CCNA Emacolet Networking Services, Inc Providing Network and Systems Project Management and Installation and Web Hosting. Phone: 919-618-2557 Web: http://www.emacolet.com Need quick reliable Systems or Network Management advice visit http://www.nmsusers.org To have principles... First have courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Mar 13 18:38:47 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from lexiconn.serverhost.net (lexiconn.serverhost.net [216.71.32.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CE5532C2E3 for ; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:38:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (rmang@localhost) by lexiconn.serverhost.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j2E2cko10580 for ; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:38:46 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:38:46 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Mangiafico X-X-Sender: rmang@lexiconn.serverhost.net To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: majordomo, sendmail 8.12, and aliases issues Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200503/13 X-Sequence-Number: 5003 We have been running majordomo 1.94.5 successfully for a long time using sendmail 8.11.x. We recently switched to 8.12.11, and now are having an issue with alias list expansion. listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l listname listname-out" listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname When an email is sent to the list, sendmail tries to deliver the email to: listname-out@server.name instead of parsing the include list for sending to the subscribers. It seems the MSP/MSA portion with submit.cf is causing the problem. We can work around it by changing the $mailer command in majordomo.cf by adding: -Am -OQueueDirectory=/usr/local/majordomo/queue to force sendmail.cf local delivery and setting a queue that majordomo has write permission on. However, I would think the system should work without having to go this route. Any ideas? Running RHEL 3 with default sendmail configuration, and standard majordomo 1.94.5. If the -Am method is the only way to make it work, are there any drawbacks or problems with using this method? Thanks. Rob From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Mar 13 19:43:59 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.bcpl.net (mail.bcpl.net [204.255.212.10]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D60532C1BE for ; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:43:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.bcpl.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.bcpl.net (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2E3htAL026778 for ; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:43:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (fold@localhost) by mail.bcpl.net (8.13.0/8.13.0/Submit) with ESMTP id j2E3hthW026773 for ; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:43:55 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.bcpl.net: fold owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:43:55 -0500 (EST) From: Chip Old X-X-Sender: fold@mail To: MAJORDOMO-USERS Subject: Re: majordomo, sendmail 8.12, and aliases issues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: X-Organization: BCPL.NET Internet Services X-Complaints-To: abuse@bcpl.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200503/14 X-Sequence-Number: 5004 On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:38 -0500, Rob Mangiafico wrote to majordomo-users@gr...: > We have been running majordomo 1.94.5 successfully for a long time using > sendmail 8.11.x. We recently switched to 8.12.11, and now are having an > issue with alias list expansion. > > listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l listname listname-out" > listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname > > When an email is sent to the list, sendmail tries to deliver the email to: > listname-out@server.name > > instead of parsing the include list for sending to the subscribers. It > seems the MSP/MSA portion with submit.cf is causing the problem. We can > work around it by changing the $mailer command in majordomo.cf by adding: > -Am -OQueueDirectory=/usr/local/majordomo/queue > > to force sendmail.cf local delivery and setting a queue that majordomo has > write permission on. However, I would think the system should work without > having to go this route. Any ideas? Running RHEL 3 with default sendmail > configuration, and standard majordomo 1.94.5. > > If the -Am method is the only way to make it work, are there any drawbacks > or problems with using this method? Sendmail 8.12.11 is pretty old. Why not 8.13.3, the current version? Not that it has anything to do with the problem, but I'm curious. We switched from 8.11.x to 8.12.x so long ago I don't remember all the details, but I do remember that there were two submit.cf issues related to Majordomo: 1) The standard build of submit.cf didn't tell Sendmail in MSA mode to use the trusted-users file, so the MSA didn't recognize the Majordomo user (majordom in our case) as a trusted user. I had to add this to submit.mc: FEATURE(`use_ct_file')dnl 2) The standard build of submit.cf didn't include a define for ALIAS_FILE. That might not matter if you have a single aliases file including Majordomo aliases as well as all your system and user aliases, but it breaks Majordomo if you use a separate file for Majordomo aliases like we do. I had to add this to submit.mc: define(`ALIAS_FILE', ``/etc/mail/aliases,/usr/local/majordomo/majordomo.aliases'')dnl Of course in the actual submit.mc that is all one line. After adding those two lines to submit.mc, do "./Build submit.cf" to get a new submit.cf. I seem to remember some permissions issues too, caused by the fact that Sendmail has become progressively stricter about permissions, but I don't remember the details. -- Chip Old (Francis E. Old) E-Mail: fold@bcpl.net BCPL Network Administrator Phone: 410-887-6180 BCPL.NET Internet Services Manager FAX: 410-887-2091 320 York Road Towson, MD 21204-5179 USA From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Mar 13 20:00:18 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from lexiconn.serverhost.net (lexiconn.serverhost.net [216.71.32.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D8BA32C22D for ; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 20:00:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (rmang@localhost) by lexiconn.serverhost.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j2E40Bu14545; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:00:11 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:00:11 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Mangiafico X-X-Sender: rmang@lexiconn.serverhost.net To: Chip Old Cc: MAJORDOMO-USERS Subject: Re: majordomo, sendmail 8.12, and aliases issues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200503/15 X-Sequence-Number: 5005 On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, Chip Old wrote: > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:38 -0500, Rob Mangiafico wrote to majordomo-users@gr...: > > > We have been running majordomo 1.94.5 successfully for a long time using > > sendmail 8.11.x. We recently switched to 8.12.11, and now are having an > > issue with alias list expansion. > > > > listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l listname listname-out" > > listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname > > > > When an email is sent to the list, sendmail tries to deliver the email to: > > listname-out@server.name > > > > instead of parsing the include list for sending to the subscribers. It > > seems the MSP/MSA portion with submit.cf is causing the problem. We can > > work around it by changing the $mailer command in majordomo.cf by adding: > > -Am -OQueueDirectory=/usr/local/majordomo/queue > > > > to force sendmail.cf local delivery and setting a queue that majordomo has > > write permission on. However, I would think the system should work without > > having to go this route. Any ideas? Running RHEL 3 with default sendmail > > configuration, and standard majordomo 1.94.5. > > > > If the -Am method is the only way to make it work, are there any drawbacks > > or problems with using this method? > > Sendmail 8.12.11 is pretty old. Why not 8.13.3, the current version? Not > that it has anything to do with the problem, but I'm curious. 8.12.11 is what ships with RHEL 3, albeit patched as needed by RH. > 1) The standard build of submit.cf didn't tell Sendmail in MSA mode to use > the trusted-users file, so the MSA didn't recognize the Majordomo user > (majordom in our case) as a trusted user. I had to add this to submit.mc: > > FEATURE(`use_ct_file')dnl Yes, this has been added. > 2) The standard build of submit.cf didn't include a define for ALIAS_FILE. > That might not matter if you have a single aliases file including > Majordomo aliases as well as all your system and user aliases, but it > breaks Majordomo if you use a separate file for Majordomo aliases like we > do. I had to add this to submit.mc: > > define(`ALIAS_FILE', > ``/etc/mail/aliases,/usr/local/majordomo/majordomo.aliases'')dnl Yes, /etc/aliases is referenced, and all aliases go in there. > I seem to remember some permissions issues too, caused by the fact that > Sendmail has become progressively stricter about permissions, but I don't > remember the details. All /usr/local/majordomo/lists directories and file are owned by majordomo, and none are group or world writable. Still getting delivery to the email address instead of the include alias expansion as expected. Anything else we can check? Or are we limited to -Am and a separate mail queue... Rob From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 14 11:45:49 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from i1internet.net (mx1.i1internet.net [209.48.112.41]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D76732C29A for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 11:45:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from [209.48.113.209] by i1internet.net [209.48.112.41] with SmartMax MailMax for majordomo-users@greatcircle.com; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:50:36 -0500 X-SmartMax-AuthUser: From: ebay2@readynote.com To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: sendmail bounces. Please help. I am so close I can taste it! Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:17:08 -0500 X-Mailer: Mailmax Webmail Message-ID: <1110829838.2064@i1internet.net> X-Archive-Number: 200503/16 X-Sequence-Number: 5006 Hi, Thanks for any clues. I am trying to setup Majordomo behind a firewall for private use... Previously I had sendmail-8.11 binaries 1/2 working. Send worked, receive bounced saying host not found. I am a DNS/hostname newie... So, I installed sendmail-8.13-3 sources, and here is where I am: Q1: Should I use my old /etc/rc.d/init.d/sendmail script? make install didnt create one.... Q1: Do I have to install BIND? Q2: Do I absolutely have to get a DNS entry? This worked perviously "mail root@199.81.66.218" and as nutty as that looks, it is ok with me ;-) ad/ThankYou/vance Jim Pruett Thanks JPruett ______________________________________ This E-Mail was sent with MailMax/WEB 4.1 From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 14 14:14:22 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.ccbnpts.com (ccbi-gw.norlight.net [207.170.5.141]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1044432C4AE for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:14:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from ccb2vpjza ([192.168.2.114]) by mail.ccbnpts.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j2EMDeeE000973 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:13:41 -0600 From: "Pettit, Paul" To: "'MAJORDOMO-USERS'" Subject: Re: majordomo, sendmail 8.12, and aliases issues Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:14:19 -0600 Message-ID: <000001c528e3$2b4a6430$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Archive-Number: 200503/17 X-Sequence-Number: 5007 > Rob Mangiafico wrote: > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, Chip Old wrote: > > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:38 -0500, Rob Mangiafico wrote to > majordomo-users@gr...: > > > > > We have been running majordomo 1.94.5 successfully for a > long time using > > > sendmail 8.11.x. We recently switched to 8.12.11, and now > are having an > > > issue with alias list expansion. > > > > > > listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l > listname listname-out" > > > listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname > > > > > > When an email is sent to the list, sendmail tries to > deliver the email to: > > > listname-out@server.name > > > I'm running much the same setup (sendmail 8.12.8-9.80, majordomo 1.94.5) but I've not seen this behavor. > > > instead of parsing the include list for sending to the > subscribers. It > > > seems the MSP/MSA portion with submit.cf is causing the > problem. We can > > > work around it by changing the $mailer command in > majordomo.cf by adding: > > > -Am -OQueueDirectory=/usr/local/majordomo/queue > > > What is in your submit.mc? > > > to force sendmail.cf local delivery and setting a queue > that majordomo has > > > write permission on. However, I would think the system > should work without > > > having to go this route. Any ideas? Running RHEL 3 with > default sendmail > > > configuration, and standard majordomo 1.94.5. > > > That might be the problem, I seem to remember that the default sendmail.mc used to make the sendmail.cf when I first set the box up that has majordomo on it was less than optimal. What is in your sendmail.mc? Do you have the 8.11 sendmail.mc that was used to make the previous sendmail.cf to compare? > > > If the -Am method is the only way to make it work, are > there any drawbacks > > > or problems with using this method? > > Not sure, I've never used that. > > Anything else we can check? Or are we limited to -Am and a > separate mail > queue... > > Rob > If your using 8.12 is smrsh configured? If so did you replace the wrapper link in /etc/smrsh to point it to the majodomo wrapper? Not sure that would cause the odd mailing, it's been a long time since I had to set up majordomo. :) Paul Pettit CTO and IS Manager Consistent Computer Bargains Inc. I've heard it said that the proof of lunacy is when you repeat the same steps expecting different results. I say it's proof that you're a Microsoft user. - comment by deshi777 on experts-exchange.com From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 14 16:44:09 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from lexiconn.serverhost.net (lexiconn.serverhost.net [216.71.32.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD4232C201 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:44:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (rmang@localhost) by lexiconn.serverhost.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j2F0i1X26089; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:44:01 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:44:01 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Mangiafico X-X-Sender: rmang@lexiconn.serverhost.net To: "Pettit, Paul" Cc: "'MAJORDOMO-USERS'" Subject: Re: majordomo, sendmail 8.12, and aliases issues In-Reply-To: <000001c528e3$2b4a6430$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200503/18 X-Sequence-Number: 5008 On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Pettit, Paul wrote: > > > > We have been running majordomo 1.94.5 successfully for a > > long time using > > > > sendmail 8.11.x. We recently switched to 8.12.11, and now > > are having an > > > > issue with alias list expansion. > > > > > > > > listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l > > listname listname-out" > > > > listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname > > > > > > > > When an email is sent to the list, sendmail tries to > > deliver the email to: > > > > listname-out@server.name > > > > > > I'm running much the same setup (sendmail 8.12.8-9.80, majordomo 1.94.5) > but I've not seen this behavor. > > > > > instead of parsing the include list for sending to the > > subscribers. It > > > > seems the MSP/MSA portion with submit.cf is causing the > > problem. We can > > > > work around it by changing the $mailer command in > > majordomo.cf by adding: > > > > -Am -OQueueDirectory=/usr/local/majordomo/queue > > > > > > What is in your submit.mc? divert(0)dnl include(`/usr/share/sendmail-cf/m4/cf.m4') VERSIONID(`linux setup for Red Hat Linux')dnl define(`confCF_VERSION', `Submit')dnl define(`ALIAS_FILE', `/etc/aliases')dnl define(`__OSTYPE__',`')dnl dirty hack to keep proto.m4 from complaining define(`_USE_DECNET_SYNTAX_', `1')dnl support DECnet define(`confTIME_ZONE', `USE_TZ')dnl define(`confDONT_INIT_GROUPS', `True')dnl define(`confPID_FILE', `/var/run/sm-client.pid')dnl dnl define(`confDIRECT_SUBMISSION_MODIFIERS',`C') FEATURE(`use_ct_file')dnl dnl dnl If you use IPv6 only, change [127.0.0.1] to [IPv6:::1] FEATURE(`msp', `[127.0.0.1]')dnl > > > > to force sendmail.cf local delivery and setting a queue > > that majordomo has > > > > write permission on. However, I would think the system > > should work without > > > > having to go this route. Any ideas? Running RHEL 3 with > > default sendmail > > > > configuration, and standard majordomo 1.94.5. > > > > > > That might be the problem, I seem to remember that the default > sendmail.mc used to make the sendmail.cf when I first set the box up > that has majordomo on it was less than optimal. What is in your > sendmail.mc? Do you have the 8.11 sendmail.mc that was used to make the > previous sendmail.cf to compare? Current sendmail.mc: --- divert(-1)dnl include(`/usr/share/sendmail-cf/m4/cf.m4')dnl VERSIONID(`setup for Red Hat Linux')dnl OSTYPE(`linux')dnl define(`confDEF_USER_ID',``8:12'')dnl define(`confTO_CONNECT', `1m')dnl define(`confTRY_NULL_MX_LIST',true)dnl define(`confDONT_PROBE_INTERFACES',true)dnl define(`PROCMAIL_MAILER_PATH',`/usr/bin/procmail')dnl define(`ALIAS_FILE', `/etc/aliases')dnl define(`STATUS_FILE', `/var/log/mail/statistics')dnl define(`UUCP_MAILER_MAX', `2000000')dnl define(`confUSERDB_SPEC', `/etc/mail/userdb.db')dnl define(`confPRIVACY_FLAGS', `authwarnings,novrfy,noexpn,restrictqrun')dnl define(`confAUTH_OPTIONS', `A')dnl TRUST_AUTH_MECH(`EXTERNAL DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-MD5 LOGIN PLAIN')dnl define(`confAUTH_MECHANISMS', `EXTERNAL GSSAPI DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-MD5 LOGIN PLAIN')dnl define(`confTO_IDENT', `0')dnl FEATURE(`no_default_msa',`dnl')dnl FEATURE(`smrsh',`/usr/sbin/smrsh')dnl FEATURE(`mailertable',`hash -o /etc/mail/mailertable.db')dnl FEATURE(`virtusertable',`hash -o /etc/mail/virtusertable.db')dnl FEATURE(redirect)dnl FEATURE(always_add_domain)dnl FEATURE(use_cw_file)dnl FEATURE(use_ct_file)dnl FEATURE(local_procmail,`',`procmail -t -Y -a $h -d $u')dnl FEATURE(`access_db',`hash -T -o /etc/mail/access.db')dnl FEATURE(`blacklist_recipients')dnl EXPOSED_USER(`root')dnl DAEMON_OPTIONS(`Port=smtp, Name=MTA')dnl FEATURE(`accept_unresolvable_domains')dnl LOCAL_DOMAIN(`localhost.localdomain')dnl MAILER(smtp)dnl MAILER(procmail)dnl --- Unforutnately, the old sendmail.cf on 8.11.x was manually generated a long time ago, so no .mc file to fall back on. > > > > If the -Am method is the only way to make it work, are > > there any drawbacks > > > > or problems with using this method? > > > > > Not sure, I've never used that. Just forces LDA to process all majordomo, no hand off to MSP/MSA. Less than optimal, as we have to run a separate queuerunner as well. My understanding on this is shaky at best. ;) > > Anything else we can check? Or are we limited to -Am and a > > separate mail > > queue... > > > > Rob > > > > If your using 8.12 is smrsh configured? If so did you replace the > wrapper link in /etc/smrsh to point it to the majodomo wrapper? Not sure > that would cause the odd mailing, it's been a long time since I had to > set up majordomo. :) smrsh is configured and working properly. Subscribe/unsub requests work well, config changes via email, etc... It's just sending to a list with double alias expansion that is the problem. I really appreciate the help, and hope to get this solved soon. :) Rob From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 14 17:02:22 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from lexiconn.serverhost.net (lexiconn.serverhost.net [216.71.32.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EEB732C2C1 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:02:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (rmang@localhost) by lexiconn.serverhost.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j2F12JE21055; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:02:19 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:02:19 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Mangiafico X-X-Sender: rmang@lexiconn.serverhost.net To: "Pettit, Paul" Cc: "'MAJORDOMO-USERS'" Subject: Re: majordomo, sendmail 8.12, and aliases issues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200503/19 X-Sequence-Number: 5009 On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Rob Mangiafico wrote: > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Pettit, Paul wrote: > > > > > > We have been running majordomo 1.94.5 successfully for a > > > long time using > > > > > sendmail 8.11.x. We recently switched to 8.12.11, and now > > > are having an > > > > > issue with alias list expansion. > > > > > > > > > > listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l > > > listname listname-out" > > > > > listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname > > > > > > > > > > When an email is sent to the list, sendmail tries to > > > deliver the email to: > > > > > listname-out@server.name > > > > > > > > > I'm running much the same setup (sendmail 8.12.8-9.80, majordomo 1.94.5) > > but I've not seen this behavor. > > > > > > > instead of parsing the include list for sending to the > > > subscribers. It > > > > > seems the MSP/MSA portion with submit.cf is causing the > > > problem. We can > > > > > work around it by changing the $mailer command in > > > majordomo.cf by adding: > > > > > -Am -OQueueDirectory=/usr/local/majordomo/queue > > > > > ok, was also posting at comp.os.sendmail, and I think we have figured it out. We had a virtusertable entry for the hostname of the server: @hostname devnull to stop any spam to the hostname of the server itself. Explanation from newsgroup (courtesy of Per Hedeland: --- Rather, 8.11 had the MSP and MTA in one, i.e. when you invoked sendmail directly it would do the actual delivery rather than passing it to the local MTA. In 8.12 and later, the MSP doesn't make any delivery decisions but just passes the message to the local MTA using SMTP - and since it's SMTP, unqualified addresses like 'list-outgoing' will be qualified with the local host name before the MTA receives the message. This isn't normally a problem, since the MTA will basically just strip off the the @hostname part and resolve to the local mailer => alias lookup. You're preventing this by having an entry ('@hostname' ?) in your virtusertable that matches list-outgoing@hostname, and does something other than resolve to the local mailer - this didn't come into play when the 8.11 MSP+MTA was passed just 'list-outgoing'. You can: - remove the virtusertable entry/ies that matches, or - add specific entries 'list-outgoing@hostname list-outgoing' in virtusertable for your lists, or - make the address passed to resend qualified with something that won't match your virtusertable entries, or matches entries that resolve to the local mailer - e.g. list-outgoing@domain or something. --- So, we remove the catchall @hostname entry, and it now works as before. We've always had the @hostname with 8.11.x, so never would have thought this was the culprit. Of course now we have to figure out how to handle email at the hostname more cleanly, but at least it is working now. Further feedback on this issue or more discussion is welcome. Thanks everyone for the help so far, it's been a fast learning curve for the new sendmail. Rob From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 14 17:52:23 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from lexiconn.serverhost.net (lexiconn.serverhost.net [216.71.32.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30C2432C332 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:52:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (rmang@localhost) by lexiconn.serverhost.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j2F1qKo22063 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:52:20 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:52:20 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Mangiafico X-X-Sender: rmang@lexiconn.serverhost.net To: "'MAJORDOMO-USERS'" Subject: Re: majordomo, sendmail 8.12, and aliases issues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200503/20 X-Sequence-Number: 5010 > > > > > > We have been running majordomo 1.94.5 successfully for a > > > > long time using > > > > > > sendmail 8.11.x. We recently switched to 8.12.11, and now > > > > are having an > > > > > > issue with alias list expansion. > > > > > > > > > > > > listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l > > > > listname listname-out" > > > > > > listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname > > > > > > > > > > > > When an email is sent to the list, sendmail tries to > > > > deliver the email to: > > > > > > listname-out@server.name > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm running much the same setup (sendmail 8.12.8-9.80, majordomo 1.94.5) > > > but I've not seen this behavor. > > > > > > > > > instead of parsing the include list for sending to the > > > > subscribers. It > > > > > > seems the MSP/MSA portion with submit.cf is causing the > > > > problem. We can > > > > > > work around it by changing the $mailer command in > > > > majordomo.cf by adding: > > > > > > -Am -OQueueDirectory=/usr/local/majordomo/queue > > > > > > > > ok, was also posting at comp.os.sendmail, and I think we have figured it > out. We had a virtusertable entry for the hostname of the server: > @hostname devnull > > to stop any spam to the hostname of the server itself. Explanation from > newsgroup (courtesy of Per Hedeland: > --- > Rather, 8.11 had the MSP and MTA in one, i.e. when you invoked sendmail > directly it would do the actual delivery rather than passing it to the > local MTA. In 8.12 and later, the MSP doesn't make any delivery > decisions but just passes the message to the local MTA using SMTP - and > since it's SMTP, unqualified addresses like 'list-outgoing' will be > qualified with the local host name before the MTA receives the message. > > This isn't normally a problem, since the MTA will basically just strip > off the the @hostname part and resolve to the local mailer => alias > lookup. You're preventing this by having an entry ('@hostname' ?) in > your virtusertable that matches list-outgoing@hostname, and does > something other than resolve to the local mailer - this didn't come into > play when the 8.11 MSP+MTA was passed just 'list-outgoing'. > > You can: > > - remove the virtusertable entry/ies that matches, or > - add specific entries 'list-outgoing@hostname list-outgoing' in > virtusertable for your lists, or > - make the address passed to resend qualified with something that won't > match your virtusertable entries, or matches entries that resolve to > the local mailer - e.g. list-outgoing@domain or something. > --- > > So, we remove the catchall @hostname entry, and it now works as before. > We've always had the @hostname with 8.11.x, so never would have thought > this was the culprit. Of course now we have to figure out how to handle > email at the hostname more cleanly, but at least it is working now. > Further feedback on this issue or more discussion is welcome. This has the ramification of allowing anyone from the outside world to post directly to the list-outgoing alias at the hostname though. So, we are back to security by obscurity, or reverting to the "-Am" method of forcing local delivery by majordomo to get around this issue. This would allow us to have a "@hostname" entry for the virtusertable to prevent the outside world from posting directly to the outgoing alias. Any other thoughts, or have I beat this horse to death? :) Rob From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 14 18:14:56 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.bcpl.net (mail.bcpl.net [204.255.212.10]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3BC32C1DA for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:14:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.bcpl.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.bcpl.net (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2F2EsIl027225 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:14:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (fold@localhost) by mail.bcpl.net (8.13.0/8.13.0/Submit) with ESMTP id j2F2EsOs027222 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:14:54 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.bcpl.net: fold owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:14:54 -0500 (EST) From: Chip Old X-X-Sender: fold@mail To: MAJORDOMO-USERS Subject: Re: majordomo, sendmail 8.12, and aliases issues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: X-Organization: BCPL.NET Internet Services X-Complaints-To: abuse@bcpl.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200503/21 X-Sequence-Number: 5011 On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:52 -0500, Rob Mangiafico wrote to 'MAJORDOMO-USERS': > This has the ramification of allowing anyone from the outside world to > post directly to the list-outgoing alias at the hostname though. So, we > are back to security by obscurity, or reverting to the "-Am" method of > forcing local delivery by majordomo to get around this issue. This would > allow us to have a "@hostname" entry for the virtusertable to prevent the > outside world from posting directly to the outgoing alias. No need for that. There is a standard solution that works with sendmail on most platforms. In virtusertable, add an entry like this for each of your lists: listname-out@yourdomain.com error:nouser User unknown Of course substitute the actual list name for "listname" and your actual domain name for "yourdomain.com". This causes sendmail to reject messages sent to the listname-out address, but doesn't prevent the alias from working. Earlier you posted this snippet of a typical set of list aliases: listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l listname listname-out" listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname If you want to obscure listname-out even more, change it to this: listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l listname listname-out, nobody" listname-out: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname Adding another username to the right-hand side of the alias prevents listname-out from appearing in outgoing message headers. And if that still isn't enough, make it difficult to guess the listname-out address by changing it to something completely different, like this: listname: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l listname qkbtpszyoup, nobody" qkbtpszyoup: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/listname If you do something like that, be sure to alter the virtusertable entries accordingly, e.g: qkbtpszyoup@yourdomain.com error:nouser User unknown -- Chip Old (Francis E. Old) E-Mail: fold@bcpl.net BCPL Network Administrator Phone: 410-887-6180 BCPL.NET Internet Services Manager FAX: 410-887-2091 320 York Road Towson, MD 21204-5179 USA From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 15 07:24:28 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mxfep01.bredband.com (mxfep01.bredband.com [195.54.107.70]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8385D32C376 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:23:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from pcgoran ([213.115.135.232] [213.115.135.232]) by mxfep01.bredband.com with SMTP id <20050315152329.NLSY7011.mxfep01.bredband.com@pcgoran> for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:23:29 +0100 Message-ID: <00e901c52972$f1394500$e88773d5@pcgoran> From: "Goran Tornqvist" To: References: <005b01c5232c$b03cb970$e88773d5@pcgoran> Subject: Subject is appended (RE: RE: RE) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:23:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00E6_01C5297B.52BD48A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Archive-Number: 200503/22 X-Sequence-Number: 5012 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00E6_01C5297B.52BD48A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sorry for posting again , just making sure that the message was sent... Won't bother you again if no one knows an answer ;) Best Regards Goran ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Goran Tornqvist=20 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com=20 Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 4:45 PM Subject: Subject is appended (RE: RE: RE) Hello, I have the following problem. Messages posted to my list looks like this (subject): RE: (listname) Re: (listname) subject. (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) (l= istname) subject Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: subject Is there any was resolve this? I just want the subject to be like: RE: (listname) subject or (listname) RE: subject Any id=E9as? Best Regards Goran ------=_NextPart_000_00E6_01C5297B.52BD48A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry for posting again , just making sure= that the=20 message was sent...
Won't bother you again if no one knows an = answer=20 ;)
 
Best Regards
Goran
 
----- Original Message -----
Fro= m:=20 = Goran=20 Tornqvist
To: majordomo-users@greatcirc= le.com=20
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 4:45= =20 PM
Subject: Subject is appended (RE: = RE:=20 RE)

Hello,
I have the following problem.
Messages posted to my list looks like th= is=20 (subject):
 
RE: (listname) Re: (listname)=20 subject.

(listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: (listname)= Re:=20 (listname) (listname) subject

Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: subject

Is there any was resolve this? I ju= st want=20 the subject to be like:

RE: (listname) subject

or

(listname) RE: subject

Any id=E9as?

Best Regards

Goran

------=_NextPart_000_00E6_01C5297B.52BD48A0-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 15 08:34:33 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.ccbnpts.com (ccbi-gw.norlight.net [207.170.5.141]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73FEE32C439 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:34:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from ccb2vpjza ([192.168.2.114]) by mail.ccbnpts.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j2FGXqeE030855 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:33:52 -0600 From: "Pettit, Paul" To: Subject: Re: Subject is appended (RE: RE: RE) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:31:12 -0600 Message-ID: <00d401c5297c$6700db00$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 In-Reply-To: <00e901c52972$f1394500$e88773d5@pcgoran> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Importance: Normal X-Archive-Number: 200503/23 X-Sequence-Number: 5013 -----Original Message----- From: Goran Tornqvist Sorry for posting again , just making sure that the message was sent... Won't bother you again if no one knows an answer ;) Best Regards Goran ----- Original Message -----=20 Hello, I have the following problem. Messages posted to my list looks like this (subject): RE: (listname) Re: (listname) subject. (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) (listname) subject Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: subject Is there any was resolve this? I just want the subject to be like: RE: (listname) subject or (listname) RE: subject Any id=E9as? Best Regards Goran =3D=3D=3D Not sure but could this be a client issue. If you have 'subject_prefix' set there should be no reason it attaches multiple $LIST entries.=20 What version of majordomo are you using? What email client are you using when replying to this list? Have you setup a test list with default settings to test if the problem shows up when just 'subject_prefix' is modified? Paul Pettit CTO and IS Manager Consistent Computer Bargains Inc. I've heard it said that the proof of lunacy is when you repeat the same steps expecting different results. I say it's proof that you're a Microsoft user. - comment by deshi777 on experts-exchange.com From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 15 09:09:09 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from eis-ml2itl.eis.ds.usace.army.mil (ncpc91h.usace.army.mil [140.194.231.242]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19D8A32C3BD for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 09:07:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from eis-ml1itl.eis.ds.usace.army.mil ([140.194.245.33]) by eis-ml2itl.eis.ds.usace.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:07:24 -0600 Received: from eis-ml1eis.eis.ds.usace.army.mil ([137.161.251.49]) by eis-ml1itl.eis.ds.usace.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:07:24 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C52981.74B14755" Subject: Majorcool .. how do we work around this limitation Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 09:07:23 -0800 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Majorcool .. how do we work around this limitation Thread-Index: AcUpgXS0FONNKjzrSsCqFZrzCVx4sQ== From: "Wilson, Sue EIS-NWD" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Mar 2005 17:07:24.0504 (UTC) FILETIME=[75471580:01C52981] X-Archive-Number: 200503/24 X-Sequence-Number: 5014 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52981.74B14755 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Setting preferences does not seem to take ... I have a list owner who wants to maintain her list and I keep getting this error with MODIFY The 29674 byte subscriber list you are attempting to modify is larger than your browser can support, as approximated by the Maximum Size Supported By Browser TextArea setting in your Preferences. Please select one of the following actions and then press the action button below:=20 The browse function will display the entire list ..but that does not help h= er modify. Sue Wilson Email Team @ CEEIS WPC Portland, OR 503 808 4965 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52981.74B14755 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Majorcool .. how do we work around this limitation

Setting preferences does not seem to t= ake ...
I  have a list owner who wants to m= aintain her list and I keep getting this error with MODIFY
The 29674 byte subscriber list you are a= ttempting to modify is larger than your browser can support, as approximate= d by the Maximum Size Supported By Browser TextArea setting in your = Preferences. Please select one of the following actions and then press the = action button below:

The browse function will display the enti= re list ..but that does not help her modify.



Sue Wilson
Email Team @ CEEIS WPC
Portland, OR
503 808 4965<= B>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C52981.74B14755-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 16 17:41:02 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from lexiconn.serverhost.net (lexiconn.serverhost.net [216.71.32.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81E832C3D8 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:41:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (rmang@localhost) by lexiconn.serverhost.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j2H1exQ25056 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:41:00 -0500 Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:40:59 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Mangiafico X-X-Sender: rmang@lexiconn.serverhost.net To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: bulk_mailer and sendmail settings for large lists Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200503/25 X-Sequence-Number: 5015 I have been reading through the archives and am not sure what settings we should use in sendmail to work with larger majordomo lists being sent out through bulk_mailer. For example, some lists have a few thousand addresses @aol, yahoo, hotmail, etc... From what I've read, there are 3 settings that can be adjusted to make these mailings go out smoothly and not get rejected by the destination or sendmail itself when sending: SMTP_MAILER_MAXMSGS SMTP_MAILER_MAXRCPTS MaxRecipientsPerMessage Which ones of the above list should be set, what are the recommended values, and does MaxRecipientsPerMessage being too low actually stop a mailing from going out (or any of the above settings)? With bulk_mailer putting like domains together, some envelopes seem to have hundreds or 1000's of addresses. We have tweaked MaxRecipientsPerMessage before, but I was never sure how best to optimize sendmail with bulk_mailer to handle both large and small lists, and large lists with large numbers of subscribers all from the same domain. Thanks. Rob From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 17 03:59:40 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mxfep02.bredband.com (mxfep02.bredband.com [195.54.107.73]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76F8A32C62F for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 03:54:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from pcgoran ([213.115.135.232] [213.115.135.232]) by mxfep02.bredband.com with SMTP id <20050317120216.CXSR4482.mxfep02.bredband.com@pcgoran> for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:02:16 +0100 Message-ID: <00d901c52ae9$2ab2bab0$e88773d5@pcgoran> From: "Goran Tornqvist" To: References: <00d401c5297c$6700db00$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> Subject: Re: Subject is appended (RE: RE: RE) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:02:12 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-Archive-Number: 200503/26 X-Sequence-Number: 5016 Solved it. It was a client issue. Parantheses was encoded in a strange way on certain e-mail clients. When changing subject_prefix to -$LIST- it worked better. thanks... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pettit, Paul" To: Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 5:31 PM Subject: Re: Subject is appended (RE: RE: RE) -----Original Message----- From: Goran Tornqvist Sorry for posting again , just making sure that the message was sent... Won't bother you again if no one knows an answer ;) Best Regards Goran ----- Original Message ----- Hello, I have the following problem. Messages posted to my list looks like this (subject): RE: (listname) Re: (listname) subject. (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) (listname) subject Re: (listname) RE: (listname) Re: (listname) RE: subject Is there any was resolve this? I just want the subject to be like: RE: (listname) subject or (listname) RE: subject Any idéas? Best Regards Goran === Not sure but could this be a client issue. If you have 'subject_prefix' set there should be no reason it attaches multiple $LIST entries. What version of majordomo are you using? What email client are you using when replying to this list? Have you setup a test list with default settings to test if the problem shows up when just 'subject_prefix' is modified? Paul Pettit CTO and IS Manager Consistent Computer Bargains Inc. I've heard it said that the proof of lunacy is when you repeat the same steps expecting different results. I say it's proof that you're a Microsoft user. - comment by deshi777 on experts-exchange.com From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 17 08:03:44 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.ccbnpts.com (ccbi-gw.norlight.net [207.170.5.141]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C18E32C159 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:03:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from ccb2vpjza ([192.168.2.114]) by mail.ccbnpts.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j2HG32eE023506 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 10:03:02 -0600 From: "Pettit, Paul" To: Subject: Re: bulk_mailer and sendmail settings for large lists Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 10:00:22 -0600 Message-ID: <008301c52b0a$6d0b1f80$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 In-reply-to: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Importance: Normal X-Archive-Number: 200503/27 X-Sequence-Number: 5017 > Rob Mangiafico wrote: > > I have been reading through the archives and am not sure what > settings we > should use in sendmail to work with larger majordomo lists > being sent out > through bulk_mailer. For example, some lists have a few > thousand addresses > @aol, yahoo, hotmail, etc... > > >From what I've read, there are 3 settings that can be > adjusted to make > these mailings go out smoothly and not get rejected by the > destination or > sendmail itself when sending: > > SMTP_MAILER_MAXMSGS > SMTP_MAILER_MAXRCPTS > MaxRecipientsPerMessage > > Which ones of the above list should be set, what are the recommended > values, and does MaxRecipientsPerMessage being too low actually stop a > mailing from going out (or any of the above settings)? With > bulk_mailer > putting like domains together, some envelopes seem to have hundreds or > 1000's of addresses. We have tweaked MaxRecipientsPerMessage > before, but I > was never sure how best to optimize sendmail with bulk_mailer > to handle > both large and small lists, and large lists with large numbers of > subscribers all from the same domain. > > Thanks. > > Rob > I'd be interested in the answer to this too. One thing though that I'd like to point out (to the poster) is that some domains really hate it when you send mass emails to them. I seem to remember a discussion a while back (where in I was edumicated) on Yaho and AOL refusing bulk mail if the 'To:' was too long (as given to it at the MTA level). So you need to be aware (if you aren't already) that allowing huge lists to go to some domains may get them refused. As this is the Mj list you might be better off posting the above in Moongroup Mail Help list. Many there know sendmail intimately and if those here can't help, they might. To subscribe: Mailhelp mailing list Mailhelp@moongroup.com http://moongroup.com/mailman/listinfo/mailhelp Anyway, can't help you much but hope others here (or at Moongroup) can. Paul Pettit CTO and IS Manager Consistent Computer Bargains Inc. I've heard it said that the proof of lunacy is when you repeat the same steps expecting different results. I say it's proof that you're a Microsoft user. - comment by deshi777 on experts-exchange.com From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 24 07:49:17 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mercury.bard.edu (mercury.bard.edu [192.246.229.25]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D82C32C29F for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:49:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from femailcop.bard.edu ([10.20.10.28]) by mercury.bard.edu (AIX5.2/8.11.6p2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id j2OFnCm577536 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2005 10:49:12 -0500 Received: from billysol.bard.edu ([10.20.10.76]) by femailcop.bard.edu (MailMonitor for SMTP v1.2.2 ) ; Thu, 24 Mar 2005 10:35:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4242E18F.6020806@bard.edu> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 10:49:35 -0500 From: Richard Draves Organization: Bard College User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Verifying Domain Names in Majordomo Lists Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0512-0, 03/22/2005), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Archive-Number: 200503/28 X-Sequence-Number: 5018 We are running majordomo on AIX 5.2. There are about 200 lists ranging in size from a few members to over 4,000 members. We would like to verify that the domain names of the e-mail addresses in the lists are valid domains (we would really like to verify the whole e-mail address, if possible) before sending the mailings. Initail testing of the AIX 'host' command has proven to be unreliable (for our own domains). Is there anyone out there who has done this kind of verification, and if so what is used? Thanks! -- Have a good day! Dick Draves Systems Administrator Bard College (845) 758-7119 From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 28 23:28:56 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.interchange.ca (ns.interchange.ca [216.126.79.2]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1769832C4DA for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2005 23:28:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.interchange.ca (Postfix, from userid 555) id F03B0861455; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 02:28:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from 24.127.21.188 by fastmail.ca with HTTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:28:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:28:45 +0000 (UTC) To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: www.PopeFuneral.com From: "Brad" X-Fastmail-IP: [24.127.21.188] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20050329072846.F03B0861455@mail.interchange.ca> X-Fastmail-Scanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: brad@fastmail.ca X-Archive-Number: 200503/29 X-Sequence-Number: 5019 What is this??? www.PopeFuneral.com who made this and is the pope really going to die this soon? _________________________________________________________________ http://fastmail.ca/ - Fast Secure Web Email for Canadians From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 29 17:26:48 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from scgis.com (www.scgis.com [68.16.197.35]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92C0832C2A2 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:23:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from crash (fw.scgis.com [68.16.197.34]) by scgis.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id j2U1MxB0077639 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:22:59 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jsd@lists.troopeight.org) Message-ID: <004301c534c7$6cc233d0$0301010a@crash> From: "Jim Daniels" To: Subject: Protecting a senders email address from the list. Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:25:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Archive-Number: 200503/30 X-Sequence-Number: 5020 Hi, I'd like to rewrite the sender address of a list member into an address in a virtually hosted email domain. I want the sender to be able to post from his real address but have a virtual address for any replies. Is there a simple place to do this in majordomo? TIA. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 30 10:39:41 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from eagle.netwrx1.com (adsl-68-248-203-41.dsl.milwwi.ameritech.net [68.248.203.41]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9AB332C621 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:38:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [68.248.203.45] (helo=NOTEBOOK-LOCAL.netwrx1.com) by eagle.netwrx1.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1DGi4i-0003NL-00 for majordomo-users@greatcircle.com; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:37:56 -0600 From: George R.Kasica To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:37:55 -0600 Organization: Netwrx Consulting Inc. Reply-To: georgek@netwrx1.com Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanner: exiscan *1DGi4i-0003NL-00*C2U6He3uktc* (Netwrx Consulting Inc., Jackson, WI USA) X-Archive-Number: 200503/31 X-Sequence-Number: 5021 Just curious, how can I filter to prevent spam from getting on my various lists and or digests? I'm running SpamAssassin 3.0.2 and getting things tagged as SPAM **** and the spam tag set to yes, and then using the taboo header setting to block it. It seems to catch most things, but I still seem to end up with spam in digests (clearly tagged as spam) as if its eiter missing the taboo header check sometimes or someone is sending directly to the digests rather than posting to the list. I have the digest postings restricted to just list members. Any suggestions? If someone needs headers or examples I can provide that. George ===[George R. Kasica]=== +1 262 677 0766 President +1 206 374 6482 FAX Netwrx Consulting Inc. Jackson, WI USA http://www.netwrx1.com georgek@netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 30 12:28:43 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.ccbnpts.com (ccbi-gw.norlight.net [207.170.5.141]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E76832C5FE for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:26:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from ccb2vpjza ([192.168.2.114]) by mail.ccbnpts.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j2UKPqeE001484 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:25:53 -0600 From: "Pettit, Paul" To: Subject: Re: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:23:11 -0600 Message-ID: <00c901c53566$4bf45fd0$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-Archive-Number: 200503/32 X-Sequence-Number: 5022 > George R.Kasica > > Just curious, how can I filter to prevent spam from getting on my > various lists and or digests? I'm running SpamAssassin 3.0.2 and > getting things tagged as SPAM **** and the spam tag set to yes, and > then using the taboo header setting to block it. > > It seems to catch most things, but I still seem to end up with spam in > digests (clearly tagged as spam) as if its eiter missing the taboo > header check sometimes or someone is sending directly to the digests > rather than posting to the list. I have the digest postings restricted > to just list members. > > Any suggestions? If someone needs headers or examples I can provide > that. > > George I think your first problem is figuring out how spam is getting on your list. Is it really spam or is something tripping up SA that is making it *think* it's spam when it isn't. A review of what SA is saying would be best then tweak any rules that responsible for the false tagging. You can also add the list's address to SA as a whitelisted address in local.cf ('whitelist_to [mailing list]') but I'd becareful there as that will open a big door to spam. Now if it really is spam then the second job would be to find out who is sending it. As you said the list is a restrict post then only members of the list can send to the list. Check the sending email addy and do a 'grep [email address]' against the mailing list file, this should find out if the address is really on the list. If so remove it (or you could just remove it without checking) or contact the person and warn them to stop or to fix the problem on their end or risk being removed from the list. Beyond that I can't help you more. I don't do digests and when I get spam on a list I have, the person gets 1 warning then shown the door. I have a very low tolarance for spam. Good luck. Paul Pettit CTO and IS Manager Consistent Computer Bargains Inc. I've heard it said that the proof of lunacy is when you repeat the same steps expecting different results. I say it's proof that you're a Microsoft user. - comment by deshi777 on experts-exchange.com From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 30 13:01:20 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from cloud.ccsf.cc.ca.us (cloud.ccsf.cc.ca.us [147.144.1.212]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4200C32C491 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:01:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (jjah@localhost) by cloud.ccsf.cc.ca.us (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id j2UL1Hu22381; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:01:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:01:17 -0800 (PST) From: "Joe R. Jah" To: "George R.Kasica" Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200503/33 X-Sequence-Number: 5023 On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, George R.Kasica wrote: > Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:37:55 -0600 > From: George R.Kasica > To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com > Subject: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest > > Just curious, how can I filter to prevent spam from getting on my > various lists and or digests? I'm running SpamAssassin 3.0.2 and > getting things tagged as SPAM **** and the spam tag set to yes, and > then using the taboo header setting to block it. > > It seems to catch most things, but I still seem to end up with spam in > digests (clearly tagged as spam) as if its eiter missing the taboo > header check sometimes or someone is sending directly to the digests > rather than posting to the list. I have the digest postings restricted > to just list members. > > Any suggestions? If someone needs headers or examples I can provide > that. Have you used the taboo header setting in listname-digest.config also, or just in listname.config? > George > > ===[George R. Kasica]=== +1 262 677 0766 > President +1 206 374 6482 FAX > Netwrx Consulting Inc. Jackson, WI USA > http://www.netwrx1.com > georgek@netwrx1.com > ICQ #12862186 Regards, Joe -- _/ _/_/_/ _/ ____________ __o _/ _/ _/ _/ ______________ _-\<,_ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ ......(_)/ (_) _/_/ oe _/ _/. _/_/ ah jjah@cloud.ccsf.cc.ca.us From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 30 13:02:56 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from sb7.songbird.com (sb7.songbird.com [208.184.79.137]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8338232C607 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:02:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (sb7.songbird.com [127.0.0.1]) by sb7.songbird.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j2UL2rcA026991 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:02:53 -0800 Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:02:54 -0800 From: kent crispin To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest Message-ID: <20050330210254.GS8050@raven.songbird.com> References: <00c901c53566$4bf45fd0$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00c901c53566$4bf45fd0$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Archive-Number: 200503/34 X-Sequence-Number: 5024 On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 02:23:11PM -0600, Pettit, Paul wrote: > Beyond that I can't help you more. I don't do digests and when I get > spam on a list I have, the person gets 1 warning then shown the door. I > have a very low tolarance for spam. A very large percentage of spam uses spoofed "from:" addresses. The address verification that majordomo uses doesn't block all spam -- the only way to really keep spam off a list is to moderate it. -- Kent Crispin kent@icann.org p: +1 310 823 9358 f: +1 310 823 8649 kent@songbird.com SIP: 81202@fwd.pulver.com From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 30 13:14:46 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.ccbnpts.com (ccbi-gw.norlight.net [207.170.5.141]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D049B32C377 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:14:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ccb2vpjza ([192.168.2.114]) by mail.ccbnpts.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j2ULE2eE003573 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:14:02 -0600 From: "Pettit, Paul" To: Subject: Re: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:11:21 -0600 Message-ID: <00da01c5356d$05f58110$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20050330210254.GS8050@raven.songbird.com> X-Archive-Number: 200503/35 X-Sequence-Number: 5025 > kent crispin > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 02:23:11PM -0600, Pettit, Paul wrote: > > Beyond that I can't help you more. I don't do digests and when I get > > spam on a list I have, the person gets 1 warning then shown > the door. I > > have a very low tolarance for spam. > > A very large percentage of spam uses spoofed "from:" addresses. The > address verification that majordomo uses doesn't block all > spam -- the > only way to really keep spam off a list is to moderate it. > > -- > Kent Crispin > I'll grant you that spoofed addresses maybe to blame but I find that it's highly unlikely that a spam is spoofed with a valid email address and to the right list by accident. Sure I see tons of bogus email addresses with my domain name attached in my spam traps but rare is the one with a valid (for my domain) email addy in it. Of course YMMV. I still think the best recourse is to determine the source of the spam (if possible), stop the spam at SA and not rely on Mj to do it but that's just my opinion. Not knowing just how much spam he has to deal with makes it hard to say if this is coincidence or "enemy action". :) Paul Pettit CTO and IS Manager Consistent Computer Bargains Inc. I've heard it said that the proof of lunacy is when you repeat the same steps expecting different results. I say it's proof that you're a Microsoft user. - comment by deshi777 on experts-exchange.com From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 30 13:21:11 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from cario.hostforweb.net (cario.hostforweb.net [66.225.230.82]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFAC932C434 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:21:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.rwsmithco.com ([66.123.225.162] helo=[192.168.1.101]) by cario.hostforweb.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1DGkcb-000236-RH; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:21:06 -0600 Message-ID: <424B17A9.2060800@conveyanced.com> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:18:33 -0800 From: Bill Houle User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Pettit, Paul" Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest References: <00da01c5356d$05f58110$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> In-Reply-To: <00da01c5356d$05f58110$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus-Scanner: Clean mail though you should still use an Antivirus X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cario.hostforweb.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - conveyanced.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200503/36 X-Sequence-Number: 5026 Pettit, Paul wrote: >I still think the best recourse is to determine the source of the spam >(if possible), stop the spam at SA and not rely on Mj to do it but >that's just my opinion. > > SA does not technically "stop" spam. It merely flags it. It is up to procmail or some other MTA mechanism to filter for the SA results. That is exactly what is being proposed with the Majordomo taboo settings. --bill From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 30 15:17:11 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.ccbnpts.com (ccbi-gw.norlight.net [207.170.5.141]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7F8C32C31F for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:17:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from ccb2vpjza ([192.168.2.114]) by mail.ccbnpts.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j2UNGQeE007989 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:16:26 -0600 From: "Pettit, Paul" To: Subject: Re: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:13:46 -0600 Message-ID: <000b01c5357e$1fc59100$7202a8c0@ccb2vpjza> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 In-Reply-To: <424B17A9.2060800@conveyanced.com> X-Archive-Number: 200503/37 X-Sequence-Number: 5027 > From: Bill Houle [mailto:bhoule@conveyanced.com] > > Pettit, Paul wrote: > > >I still think the best recourse is to determine the source > of the spam > >(if possible), stop the spam at SA and not rely on Mj to do it but > >that's just my opinion. > > > > > > SA does not technically "stop" spam. It merely flags it. It is up to > procmail or some other MTA mechanism to filter for the SA > results. That > is exactly what is being proposed with the Majordomo taboo settings. > > --bill > True, SA doesn't "stop" spam. SA+Procmail does however. :) Still if spam is getting in to his list via a particular email address I'd still recommend investigating. If it's a spoof then ok, you know your just unlucky. If it's a person sending spam through on purpose however ... Paul Pettit From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 30 18:41:43 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from planet.fef.com (planet.fef.com [157.22.35.7]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A086932C3B5 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:41:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from planet.fef.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by planet.fef.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/check_local-5) with ESMTP id j2V2fYpu019294; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:41:34 -0800 Received: (from alvin@localhost) by planet.fef.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id j2V2fYiu019293; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:41:34 -0800 From: Alvin Oga Message-Id: <200503310241.j2V2fYiu019293@planet.fef.com> Subject: Re: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest To: georgek@netwrx1.com Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:41:34 -0800 (PST) Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: from "George R.Kasica" at Mar 30, 2005 12:37:55 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200503/38 X-Sequence-Number: 5028 hi ya george > George R.Kasica wrote: > > Just curious, how can I filter to prevent spam from getting on my > various lists and or digests? I'm running SpamAssassin 3.0.2 and > getting things tagged as SPAM **** and the spam tag set to yes, and > then using the taboo header setting to block it. .. > have the digest postings restricted to just list members. good to block spam ... ( bounce it before you have to deal with it in any form ) - use a closed mailing list, ( members only ) ( that you've already done ) - spammers will probably not be members and probably will not subscribe .. spam it .. and unsubscribe - additional spam prevention rules ... may or may not work for you ( aka some consider it bad practice .. others use it .. just depends ( on ones tolerance for spam and what you're willing to do to stop it - spam is best stopped at the MTA ... not after you got the spam - deny html-based emails ( no reason to have html-based emails ) ( that gets rid of 95% of the junk ) - deny all sending MTA access if it does not have a reverse dns entry - deny incoming emails to fake email addy on your end .. - it's lot harder to decide to if the sendimg emails are fake - rejecting emails from other domains will be a problem when deny incoming emails from joe@domain.com that was sent from isp-hosting-domain.com that hosts joe's site ( ie. sending domain must match reply domains ) - endless list of stopping spam rules - my personal issue with spam assassin... and equivalents - it does not deny incoming connections from (suspect) spammers - i still have to deal with the spam after it was received ( the above 2 requirements being important requirements for me ) - it flags legit emails as spam when its not - i have to create mroe special folders for suspect spam - i have to teach it ( setting arbitrary "spam numbers" ) c ya alvin From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 31 18:57:35 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from eagle.netwrx1.com (adsl-68-248-203-41.dsl.milwwi.ameritech.net [68.248.203.41]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2953432C4C7 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 18:57:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from [68.248.203.45] (helo=NOTEBOOK-LOCAL.netwrx1.com) by eagle.netwrx1.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1DHCLT-0001Nv-00; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:57:15 -0600 From: George R.Kasica To: "Joe R. Jah" Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:57:14 -0600 Organization: Netwrx Consulting Inc. Reply-To: georgek@netwrx1.com Message-ID: <72co41lo3nuu4mfncemdhm6rogj3ot692m@4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanner: exiscan *1DHCLT-0001Nv-00*UkXrV6FwV6c* (Netwrx Consulting Inc., Jackson, WI USA) X-Archive-Number: 200503/39 X-Sequence-Number: 5029 >On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:01:17 -0800 (PST), you wrote: >On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, George R.Kasica wrote: > >> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:37:55 -0600 >> From: George R.Kasica >> To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com >> Subject: SPAM Filtering from lists/digest >> >> Just curious, how can I filter to prevent spam from getting on my >> various lists and or digests? I'm running SpamAssassin 3.0.2 and >> getting things tagged as SPAM **** and the spam tag set to yes, and >> then using the taboo header setting to block it. >> >> It seems to catch most things, but I still seem to end up with spam in >> digests (clearly tagged as spam) as if its eiter missing the taboo >> header check sometimes or someone is sending directly to the digests >> rather than posting to the list. I have the digest postings restricted >> to just list members. >> >> Any suggestions? If someone needs headers or examples I can provide >> that. > >Have you used the taboo header setting in listname-digest.config also, >or just in listname.config? Here are the settings for the "regular" list: # taboo_headers [regexp_array] (undef) # If any of the headers matches one of these regexps, then the # message will be bounced for review. taboo_headers << END /^X-Spam-Status: Yes/i /^X-Spam-Flag: YES/i /^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*/i END and the corresponding digest: # taboo_headers [regexp_array] (undef) # If any of the headers matches one of these regexps, then the # message will be bounced for review. taboo_headers << END /^X-Spam-Status: Yes/i /^X-Spam-Flag: YES/i /^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*/ - END I see a difference here and have edited that to match all the other digests and lists which are like the first one. Could that be the cause of the spam getting in? If not, what other steps can I take to filter this out short of moderating the lists. I'm also currently preventing MIME on the lists, but it seems as if the spammers can get the stuff through somehow. I tested posting a MIME attach to each list and it was stripped. Is is possible they are sending to one of the majordomo or list-owner or outgoing addresses and somehow bypassing the scans, etc? Here is a header from one list message that is clearly marked as spam yet ended up in my digest directory...it seems like they are sending to the digestify address directly.....this seems to be the "methodf used for all the spam that gets through...HELP! [root@eagle acg-l-digest]# more 001 From lint.Khan@hotmail.com Fri Mar 11 07:37:50 2005 Received: from mail by eagle.netwrx1.com with spam-scanned (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1D9kKj-00049Y-00; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:37:45 -0600 Received: from [61.177.119.253] (helo=68.248.203.41) by eagle.netwrx1.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1D9kKS-00049P-00; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:37:27 -0600 X-Message-Info: 09ZUSUvrbtu59725CHLJHlbbzjMZEMXRDcf+3548 Received: from pol731.je.lint.Khan@hotmail.com ([101.80.150.24]) by uit5631-bmf. 61.177.119.253 with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:34:14 +0300 Message-ID: jkjmeinauprtecoqksmj@127.0.0.1 Conversion-With-Loss: Yes Sensitivity: 3 Expiry-Date: Never Xref: wwgdlcfubvnyopgjzxrn Reply-To: "Rosa Joseph" From: "Rosa Joseph" To: acg-l-digest-outgoing@netwrx1.com, acg-l-digestify@netwrx1.com Subject: ***** SPAM ***** market you healthcare products to all hospitals.7,000 Senior Hospitals,, 172,000 Senior Hospital Administrators and doctors. Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:28:14 +0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; [root@eagle acg-l-digest]# more 001 From lint.Khan@hotmail.com Fri Mar 11 07:37:50 2005 Received: from mail by eagle.netwrx1.com with spam-scanned (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1D9kKj-00049Y-00; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:37:45 -0600 Received: from [61.177.119.253] (helo=68.248.203.41) by eagle.netwrx1.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1D9kKS-00049P-00; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:37:27 -0600 X-Message-Info: 09ZUSUvrbtu59725CHLJHlbbzjMZEMXRDcf+3548 Received: from pol731.je.lint.Khan@hotmail.com ([101.80.150.24]) by uit5631-bmf. 61.177.119.253 with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:34:14 +0300 Message-ID: jkjmeinauprtecoqksmj@127.0.0.1 Conversion-With-Loss: Yes Sensitivity: 3 Expiry-Date: Never Xref: wwgdlcfubvnyopgjzxrn Reply-To: "Rosa Joseph" From: "Rosa Joseph" To: acg-l-digest-outgoing@netwrx1.com, acg-l-digestify@netwrx1.com Subject: ***** SPAM ***** market you healthcare products to all hospitals.7,000 Senior Hospitals,, 172,000 Senior Hospital Administrators and doctors. Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:28:14 +0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--35091972050672979" X-Scanner: exiscan *1D9kKS-00049P-00*zgNVjVp6L5M* (Netwrx Consulting Inc., Jacks on, WI USA) X-Spam-Prev-Subject: market you healthcare products to all hospitals.7,000 Senio r Hospitals,, 172,000 Senior Hospital Administrators and doctors. X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on eagle.netwrx1.com X-Spam-Level: ****************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=30.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,DCC_CHECK, DIGEST_MULTIPLE,FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD,INVALID_MSGID, MIME_BOUND_DD_DIGITS,RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100,RAZOR2_CHECK, RCVD_HELO_IP_MISMATCH,RCVD_IN_DSBL,RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,RCVD_IN_XBL,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO, SARE_HEAD_HDR_CONVWLS,SARE_HEAD_HDR_EXPRYDT,SARE_HEAD_HDR_XREF, X_MESSAGE_INFO autolearn=spam version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Report: * 1.1 SARE_HEAD_HDR_CONVWLS Message headers used which identify spam * 0.5 SARE_HEAD_HDR_XREF Message headers used which identify spam * 4.2 X_MESSAGE_INFO Bulk email fingerprint (X-Message-Info) found * 4.1 MIME_BOUND_DD_DIGITS Spam tool pattern in MIME boundary * 0.5 SARE_HEAD_HDR_EXPRYDT Message headers used which identify spam * 2.5 FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD Forged hotmail.com 'Received:' header found * 2.2 RCVD_HELO_IP_MISMATCH Received: HELO and IP do not match, but sho uld * 1.2 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO * 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.5002] * 0.1 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 BODY: Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 1.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 2.2 DCC_CHECK Listed in DCC (http://rhyolite.com/anti-spam/dcc/) * 2.0 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP addre ss * [61.177.119.253 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 3.8 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org * [] * 3.1 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL * [61.177.119.253 listed in sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org] * 0.0 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is a abuseable web server * [61.177.119.253 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 0.1 RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL RBL: NJABL: dialup sender did non-local SMTP * [61.177.119.253 listed in combined.njabl.org] * 0.1 DIGEST_MULTIPLE Message hits more than one network digest check * 1.1 INVALID_MSGID Message-Id is not valid, according to RFC 2822 and another header: To: acg-l@netwrx1.com Cc: acg-l-digest-outgoing@netwrx1.com, acg-l-digestify@netwrx1.com, acg-l-outgoing@netwrx1.com, er-skunk-works@netwrx1.com,felinetalk@netwrx1.com, georgek@netwrx1.com, mailer-daemon@netwrx1.com, nursesforum@netwrx1.com, owner-acg-l@netwrx1.com George ===[George R. Kasica]=== +1 262 677 0766 President +1 206 374 6482 FAX Netwrx Consulting Inc. Jackson, WI USA http://www.netwrx1.com georgek@netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186