Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/Response

Thanks for everyone's thoughts and suggestions. I have recommended setting each list on emergency moderation. They have about a dozen lists for various tasks. So, I suggested each list be assigned a moderator/administrator (Currently one person manages all lists). Since the fear is the person will

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/Response

On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 12:18:26 -0800 Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Karl Zander wrote: >> >> Fundamentally, its not a technology problem. > > > Agreed, but as others have suggested, technology can >help. Yes. I didn't mean to imply it could not. We are using technology to help us

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/Response

Karl Zander wrote: > > Fundamentally, its not a technology problem. Agreed, but as others have suggested, technology can help. For example, if the 'bad guy' has a fixed IP, you can set header_filter_rules to discard messages that have that IP in a Received: header. Of course, that may just force

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/Response

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:54:59 -0800 Bob Morse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thank you all for your insights in the >Challenge/Response question. I am > convinced this is not the way to go. In fact, I used >some of the same > arguments to the client when he brought it up. > > The problem remains,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/Response

> > The problem remains, however: How do I prevent spoofing? In this case they > have a real fear due to a board member who is soon to be ejected from the > board and have organizational membership taken away. They feel he is capable > (both emotionally and technically) of major disturbances on on

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/Response

Bob Morse writes: > The problem remains, however: How do I prevent spoofing? In this case they > have a real fear due to a board member who is soon to be ejected from the > board and have organizational membership taken away. They feel he is capable > (both emotionally and technically) of majo

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/Response

At 3:54 PM -0800 2/9/07, Bob Morse wrote: > The problem remains, however: How do I prevent spoofing? If the problem is that sensitive, then your only option that I can see is to use human moderation. For each message that comes in, you have a human look at it to see if it's legitimate or not,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/Response

Thank you all for your insights in the Challenge/Response question. I am convinced this is not the way to go. In fact, I used some of the same arguments to the client when he brought it up. The problem remains, however: How do I prevent spoofing? In this case they have a real fear due to a board m

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/response

Bob Morse wrote: > I have a client who is concerned about his list subscriber addresses being > spoofed. In other words someone who knows the addresses of people on the > list can set up a mail server and spoof the subscriber so he can post nasty > things to the list. He would like to set up a chal

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/response

> > I have a client who is concerned about his list subscriber addresses being > spoofed. In other words someone who knows the addresses of people on the > list can set up a mail server and spoof the subscriber so he can post nasty > things to the list. He would like to set up a challenge/response

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/response

Brad Knowles writes: > Challenge/response is one of the most vile inventions that has ever > been applied to the concept of Internet e-mail. *chuckle* I wouldn't go so far, since the spam that evoked it is far worse, but I'm steadfastly opposed to challenge-response. If you absolutely *must*

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/response

Quoting Brad Knowles ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > At 1:40 PM -0800 2/8/07, Bob Morse wrote: > > He would like to set up a challenge/response mechanism > > so that when [EMAIL PROTECTED] posts to the list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gets > > sent a > > copy of the message and must confirm th

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/response

At 1:40 PM -0800 2/8/07, Bob Morse wrote: > He would like to set up a challenge/response mechanism > so that when [EMAIL PROTECTED] posts to the list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gets > sent a > copy of the message and must confirm that he/she was the sender before it > gets posted.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/response

Bob Morse wrote: > >BTW, searching the archives at mail-arcihve.com gets a 404 error. I see that too, but that is a www.mail-archive.com issue. We can't do anything about it. See for info on searching

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge/response

On 2/8/07, Bob Morse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a client who is concerned about his list subscriber addresses being > spoofed. In other words someone who knows the addresses of people on the > list can set up a mail server and spoof the subscriber so he can post nasty > things to the list.

[Mailman-Users] Challenge/response

I have a client who is concerned about his list subscriber addresses being spoofed. In other words someone who knows the addresses of people on the list can set up a mail server and spoof the subscriber so he can post nasty things to the list. He would like to set up a challenge/response mechanism

[OT] [Mailman-Users] Challenge

18-Feb-03 at 10:35, Keith Mastin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > >17-Feb-03 at 17:39, Keith Mastin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > >> Because they're running XP, I can't suggest that they allow me to drop > >> in a linux firewall because of the bugs in the XP tcp/ip stack, not > >> unless they agree to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

>17-Feb-03 at 17:39, Keith Mastin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : >> Because they're running XP, I can't suggest that they allow me to drop >> in a linux firewall because of the bugs in the XP tcp/ip stack, not >> unless they agree to back down to Win2k, which they can no longer >> purchase licences an

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

17-Feb-03 at 17:39, Keith Mastin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > Because they're running XP, I can't suggest that they allow me to drop > in a linux firewall because of the bugs in the XP tcp/ip stack, not > unless they agree to back down to Win2k, which they can no longer > purchase licences and sup

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 10:09:17 -0400 Cody Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why not make a release of it? The wider the user range, the more > popular. If nobody will take any interest, so be it. The simple fact that nobody has yet bothered with such a port pretty well indicates the lack of inte

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

>At 04:11 PM 2/17/2003, you wrote: >>At 20:13 17/02/2003, Cody Harris wrote: >>Why not use Win 98 as a server platform on which to run Mailman? >> >>Quite simply because it is not a robust Operating System with any real >>pretensions to being even a modestly secure server platform. Win 98, 98SE >

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

At 04:11 PM 2/17/2003, you wrote: At 20:13 17/02/2003, Cody Harris wrote: Why not use Win 98 as a server platform on which to run Mailman? Quite simply because it is not a robust Operating System with any real pretensions to being even a modestly secure server platform. Win 98, 98SE and ME have

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

At 20:13 17/02/2003, Cody Harris wrote: I do, and no, i have not. If i knew how, i would. At 01:03 PM 2/17/03, you wrote: >Heh, if anyone wants to, they can try to install Mailman on my Win32 box. I >have, uh, never used Python so it'd be stupid for me to try. If anyone >does, they should give t

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

I do, and no, i have not. If i knew how, i would. At 01:03 PM 2/17/03, you wrote: >Heh, if anyone wants to, they can try to install Mailman on my Win32 box. I >have, uh, never used Python so it'd be stupid for me to try. If anyone >does, they should give the good folks at Mailman (developers) a h

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

>Heh, if anyone wants to, they can try to install Mailman on my Win32 box. I >have, uh, never used Python so it'd be stupid for me to try. If anyone >does, they should give the good folks at Mailman (developers) a hint that >they should make a Win32 release of it. That is, if it works. It's an o

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Simon White wrote: > Getting an MTA to talk with Win32 might be harder, but apparently Exim > and maybe Postfix will work under cygwin. Windows 2000 comes with a SMTP server too. Making it work with Mailman would be a little tricky though. As shipped it is only meant to rela

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

17-Feb-03 at 10:09, Cody Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > Why not make a release of it? The wider the user range, the more popular. > If nobody will take any interest, so be it. If only it were that simple. Usually, releasing something (as a binary) for Windows means BUYING a compiler from Mi

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

Why not make a release of it? The wider the user range, the more popular. If nobody will take any interest, so be it. At 10:16 AM 2/17/03, you wrote: 17-Feb-03 at 09:58, Cody Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > Heh, if anyone wants to, they can try to install Mailman on my Win32 box. I > have,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Challenge

17-Feb-03 at 09:58, Cody Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > Heh, if anyone wants to, they can try to install Mailman on my Win32 box. I > have, uh, never used Python so it'd be stupid for me to try. If anyone > does, they should give the good folks at Mailman (developers) a hint that > they sh

[Mailman-Users] Challenge

Heh, if anyone wants to, they can try to install Mailman on my Win32 box. I have, uh, never used Python so it'd be stupid for me to try. If anyone does, they should give the good folks at Mailman (developers) a hint that they should make a Win32 release of it. That is, if it works. It's an open