Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #8853 > unrolled thread

can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string>

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2016-09-10 15:50 +0200
    Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> - 2016-09-10 16:50 +0200
      Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2016-09-10 17:20 +0200
        Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> - 2016-09-10 18:00 +0200
          Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2016-09-10 18:30 +0200
            Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2016-09-10 18:40 +0200
              Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> "W. Martin Borgert" <debacle@debian.org> - 2016-09-10 20:50 +0200
          Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2016-09-23 16:20 +0200
            Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> - 2016-09-23 16:40 +0200
            Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> - 2016-09-23 17:00 +0200
            Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2016-09-23 20:10 +0200
      Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> - 2016-09-10 20:50 +0200
    Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> - 2016-09-10 20:40 +0200
      Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> "Paul R. Tagliamonte" <paultag@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 21:00 +0200
      Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2016-09-10 21:30 +0200
        Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2016-09-11 05:00 +0200
          Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2016-09-11 10:50 +0200
            Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2016-09-11 11:00 +0200
              Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2016-09-11 11:50 +0200
                Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> - 2016-09-11 21:40 +0200
                  Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2016-09-15 14:20 +0200
            Re: can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string> Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> - 2016-09-11 20:30 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#8853 — can we disable the bounce kicker? Re: confirm <string>

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 2:19 PM,
<python-modules-team-request@lists.alioth.debian.org> wrote:
> Your membership in the mailing list Python-modules-team has been
> disabled due to excessive bounces The last bounce received from you
> was dated 10-Sep-2016.  You will not get any more messages from this
> list until you re-enable your membership.  You will receive 3 more
> reminders like this before your membership in the list is deleted.

I'm sure i'm not the only member using gmail, which bounces spam
emails and that what causes this problem. I'm experiencing this more
and more frequently.

can we turn off the auto-membershp-disable feature for our mailing list?

Thanks,
-- 
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8854

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 02:46:54PM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 2:19 PM,
> <python-modules-team-request@lists.alioth.debian.org> wrote:
> > Your membership in the mailing list Python-modules-team has been
> > disabled due to excessive bounces The last bounce received from you
> > was dated 10-Sep-2016.  You will not get any more messages from this
> > list until you re-enable your membership.  You will receive 3 more
> > reminders like this before your membership in the list is deleted.
> 
> I'm sure i'm not the only member using gmail, which bounces spam
> emails and that what causes this problem. I'm experiencing this more
> and more frequently.
> 
> can we turn off the auto-membershp-disable feature for our mailing list?

AFAIK, Gmail does not bounce spam. It rejects messages with broken
DKIM signatures.

What will probably solve your problem is dropping any subject munging
and any footer that the list server adds to all messages. This was
done on the lists.debian.org domain not a long time ago (there was a
footer), but I'm not sure about the different lists at
lists.alioth.debian.org.

Try asking that to whoever maintains the list instead of asking that
they remove the auto-membership-disable feature.

Thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8855

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 02:46:54PM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 2:19 PM,
>> <python-modules-team-request@lists.alioth.debian.org> wrote:
>> > Your membership in the mailing list Python-modules-team has been
>> > disabled due to excessive bounces The last bounce received from you
>> > was dated 10-Sep-2016.  You will not get any more messages from this
>> > list until you re-enable your membership.  You will receive 3 more
>> > reminders like this before your membership in the list is deleted.
>>
>> I'm sure i'm not the only member using gmail, which bounces spam
>> emails and that what causes this problem. I'm experiencing this more
>> and more frequently.
>>
>> can we turn off the auto-membershp-disable feature for our mailing list?
>
> AFAIK, Gmail does not bounce spam. It rejects messages with broken
> DKIM signatures.

no. it rejects (yes technically not bounce, the mails are rejected in
the smtp session to gmails MX servers) mails as
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/python-modules-team/2016-September/033740.html
which never reached my inbox (not even in the spam folder)

> What will probably solve your problem is dropping any subject munging
> and any footer that the list server adds to all messages. This was
> done on the lists.debian.org domain not a long time ago (there was a
> footer), but I'm not sure about the different lists at
> lists.alioth.debian.org.
>
> Try asking that to whoever maintains the list instead of asking that
> they remove the auto-membership-disable feature.

the decision should made by the team


-- 
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8856

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 04:15:19PM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> wrote:

> > AFAIK, Gmail does not bounce spam. It rejects messages with broken
> > DKIM signatures.
> 
> no. it rejects (yes technically not bounce, the mails are rejected in
> the smtp session to gmails MX servers) mails as
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/python-modules-team/2016-September/033740.html
> which never reached my inbox (not even in the spam folder)

Fine, but it is yet to be seen that the quoted message is rejected for
being "spam" (which is not an exact science), it could also be rejected
for having a broken DKIM signature (which may be checked automatically),
as the email is clearly modified by the list server.

The "[Python-modules-team]" thing in the subject is probably enough to
break the DKIM signature.

We should really not be sending messages having broken signatures to
the outside world, including our own email inboxes.

And email users subscribed to one or more mailing lists should really
use email filters to filter email, not rely on this obnoxious subject
munging.

More to the point, when you subscribe to a mailing list, you should be
ready to accept all messages from such mailing list, not accept some
messages and reject others.

Thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8857

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 05:34:12PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 04:15:19PM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> wrote:
> Fine, but it is yet to be seen that the quoted message is rejected for
> being "spam" (which is not an exact science), it could also be rejected
> for having a broken DKIM signature (which may be checked automatically),
> as the email is clearly modified by the list server.

I've never seen rejected email from gmail's SMTP due to broken DKIM.
AFAICT it just puts them in Spam (and only for the domains that enforce
DKIM to be valid).

OTOH, in my rely mail hosts I often see messagges like this:
[wrapped for convenience]
Sep  5 07:42:41 kahlan postfix/smtp[25940]: C67BF41796:
to=<mapreri@gmail.com>, orig_to=<mattia@mapreri.org>,
relay=alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[173.194.222.26]:25, delay=248373,
delays=248370/0.08/2.6/0.27, dsn=4.7.0, status=deferred (host
alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[173.194.222.26] said: 421-4.7.0
[95.85.2.163      15] Our system has detected that this message is
421-4.7.0 suspicious due to the nature of the content and/or the links
within. 421-4.7.0 To best protect our users from spam, the message has
been blocked. 421-4.7.0 Please visit 421 4.7.0
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/188131 for more information.
24si4125534ljb.48 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA command))


Usually those kind of emails stick there and postfix keeps trying them
until they eventually hit the timeout and my rely rejects them too.

> The "[Python-modules-team]" thing in the subject is probably enough to
> break the DKIM signature.

also the footer, if there is one, as it's default of mailman.

> We should really not be sending messages having broken signatures to
> the outside world, including our own email inboxes.

~all mailman mailing lists distributes messagges with broken DKIM
signatures since the conception, the world did not end.  It's plain
annoying only for the very few domains that enforce them (notabily:
yahoo, but I stopped caring for it).

> And email users subscribed to one or more mailing lists should really
> use email filters to filter email, not rely on this obnoxious subject
> munging.

yes.

> More to the point, when you subscribe to a mailing list, you should be
> ready to accept all messages from such mailing list, not accept some
> messages and reject others.

I agree gmail is broken there (and not only there), though I'm still an
user too...
The correct behaviour if they really want to avoid spam to even reach
the spam folder, is to accept the email, and discard it.


Mattia,
whom suffers from this for the debian-science-maintainers ML.

-- 
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8858

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> wrote:
> The correct behaviour if they really want to avoid spam to even reach
> the spam folder, is to accept the email, and discard it.

err that's wrong, so wrong. every email provider with a handful of
users rejects spam messages in the smtp session; not doing so is a
waste of time, it doesnt give any information back to the sender (that
in some rare case is a human and really wants to know the email was
not received) and in some countries (italy to name one) you would be
breaking the law accepting emails and not delivering them to the
recipient.

now that we discussed at length how we should handle the smtp service
with spam, can we please get back on topic? is it possible for the
admins to disable the auto-membership-suspend option on the the python
teams mailing list? is it something others would rather keep or not?

-- 
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8860

On 2016-09-10 17:29, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> in some countries (italy to name one) you would be
> breaking the law accepting emails and not delivering them to the
> recipient.

Same in Germany, AFAIK.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8886

On 09/10/2016 05:34 PM, Santiago Vila wrote:
> The "[Python-modules-team]" thing in the subject is probably enough to
> break the DKIM signature.

I don't believe DKIM signature is done on the header+body. If I'm not
mistaking, it's done only in the body of the mail, because each SMTP
server on the way to your inbox can add a "Received:" field, so you can
trace the email.

So yes, footers in emails can break stuff, but not mangling subject,
which is part of the metadata.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8887

Yes, you are mistaken :-)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DomainKeys_Identified_Mail#How_it_works

Thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8889

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

 ❦ 23 septembre 2016 16:15 CEST, Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> :

>> The "[Python-modules-team]" thing in the subject is probably enough to
>> break the DKIM signature.
>
> I don't believe DKIM signature is done on the header+body. If I'm not
> mistaking, it's done only in the body of the mail, because each SMTP
> server on the way to your inbox can add a "Received:" field, so you can
> trace the email.
>
> So yes, footers in emails can break stuff, but not mangling subject,
> which is part of the metadata.

DKIM can also be done on the headers (and usually is). The DKIM
signature contains the list of headers that were used for the
signature. See the headers of the message from Sandro:

#v+
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
         :subject:to:cc;
        bh=aIVZ7A5RI8js3S6zxiwDgAgKRvn7VlX7UW8naQXAUxk=;
        b=yWundTut0iTb/fNwkvU0hu4v5+s6vQW/pZN4gGZQpV7exzsUGKHjYs8BTCobNWvpEI
         DugPdBz8MszdzoibvUW6vNij26BS+uh6xFmBfUj26xAWJKGpXzYvqGkfQ2FfTkZi6Dvf
         PlBuHkrzyt8E8FoiD9i+ZIy5VTEV0FeS2KCbVwhU/dflrzxbkwr4eTZLsTU2TTy9OaXL
         Mw44tf8xU4NhlVJGzAsUyX/p+epTHuSMb82l6oyiioTOoJ9Uc2aBWigyv2OTjFas4B/G
         EuBKBSwGPQuav9ghqFbaACngF5Mny5dyFEbKI8/oRB/no8IHWVRe+sYti8yL2fuyDG6U
         SIag==
#v-
-- 
Test input for validity and plausibility.
            - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8890

On Friday, September 23, 2016 04:15:23 PM Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 09/10/2016 05:34 PM, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > The "[Python-modules-team]" thing in the subject is probably enough to
> > break the DKIM signature.
> 
> I don't believe DKIM signature is done on the header+body. If I'm not
> mistaking, it's done only in the body of the mail, because each SMTP
> server on the way to your inbox can add a "Received:" field, so you can
> trace the email.
> 
> So yes, footers in emails can break stuff, but not mangling subject,
> which is part of the metadata.

Not correct.  In DKIM there is a header hash and a body hash that are 
calculated separately.  If either changes, then signature verification will 
fail.

You can control which header fields are included, but ~everyone includes 
subject.

Scott K

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8861

On Sep 10, 2016, at 04:32 PM, Santiago Vila wrote:

>AFAIK, Gmail does not bounce spam. It rejects messages with broken
>DKIM signatures.

There are a number of DKIM mitigation features in newer versions of Mailman 2
that should be investigated.  I can't tell what version of Mailman this list
is using, and obviously don't have any access to the list or system
configurations.  If it really is DKIM that's causing your problem, please look
at these.  I haven't seen any reports of changing GMail behavior here on the
mailman-users list, although I haven't been watching carefully lately.

Cheers,
-Barry

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8859

On Sep 10, 2016, at 02:46 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:

>I'm sure i'm not the only member using gmail, which bounces spam
>emails and that what causes this problem.

Are you sure about that?  Bouncing spam has been bad practice for a very long
time.

Cheers,
-Barry

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8862

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Yeah, I get these (quite annoying) bounce warnings on my gmail account once
in a while. It's quite annoying.

   Paul

On Sep 10, 2016 2:35 PM, "Barry Warsaw" <barry@debian.org> wrote:

> On Sep 10, 2016, at 02:46 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>
> >I'm sure i'm not the only member using gmail, which bounces spam
> >emails and that what causes this problem.
>
> Are you sure about that?  Bouncing spam has been bad practice for a very
> long
> time.
>
> Cheers,
> -Barry
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8863

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sep 10, 2016, at 02:46 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>
>>I'm sure i'm not the only member using gmail, which bounces spam
>>emails and that what causes this problem.
>
> Are you sure about that?  Bouncing spam has been bad practice for a very long
> time.

i indeed used a wrong term (in email-world bounce has a specific
meaning): gmail rejects spam emails (according to its filters) during
the smtp session with the other MTA, so it's not a bounce, but the
sender (alioth in this case) cant deliver the email, and that's what
triggers the suspended membership process.

-- 
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8864

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 3:23 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> On Sep 10, 2016, at 02:46 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>>
>>>I'm sure i'm not the only member using gmail, which bounces spam
>>>emails and that what causes this problem.
>>
>> Are you sure about that?  Bouncing spam has been bad practice for a very long
>> time.
>
> i indeed used a wrong term (in email-world bounce has a specific
> meaning): gmail rejects spam emails (according to its filters) during
> the smtp session with the other MTA, so it's not a bounce, but the
> sender (alioth in this case) cant deliver the email, and that's what
> triggers the suspended membership process.

Rejecting instead of discarding spam sent to mailing lists has also
been bad practice for a long time.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8865

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
> Rejecting instead of discarding spam sent to mailing lists has also
> been bad practice for a long time.

thanks for another OT mail, please read my other reply on the matter
or rejecting mails by smtp systems

now can we PLEASE stop talking about how the perfect smtp system
should work and GET BACK to discuss if we are able and want to disable
the suspend membership upon bounces (that's what the mail you receive
says, so do not nitpick on this term again)

thanks

-- 
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8866

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 09:41:46AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> now can we PLEASE stop talking about how the perfect smtp system
> should work and GET BACK to discuss if we are able and want to disable
> the suspend membership upon bounces (that's what the mail you receive
> says, so do not nitpick on this term again)

Yes it can be done.  In the administrative panel of mailman lists there
is this page at /admin/<list>/bounce:
https://volatile.mapreri.org/2016-09-11/80a0f21170e6f0098db20e2536b8dedb/mailman_Bounce_processing_.png

Now, you've got to ask to the admin of that mailing list, which appears
to be jwilk.  I find that particularly interesting, given that afaik he
left the team some time ago.
I don't know whether anybody else knows the administration password
other than him.

-- 
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8867

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 09:41:46AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>> now can we PLEASE stop talking about how the perfect smtp system
>> should work and GET BACK to discuss if we are able and want to disable
>> the suspend membership upon bounces (that's what the mail you receive
>> says, so do not nitpick on this term again)
>
> Yes it can be done.  In the administrative panel of mailman lists there
> is this page at /admin/<list>/bounce:
> https://volatile.mapreri.org/2016-09-11/80a0f21170e6f0098db20e2536b8dedb/mailman_Bounce_processing_.png

Thanks Mattia!!

> Now, you've got to ask to the admin of that mailing list, which appears
> to be jwilk.  I find that particularly interesting, given that afaik he
> left the team some time ago.
> I don't know whether anybody else knows the administration password
> other than him.

Hey jwilk, would you be able to disable the suspend membership upon
bounces on the python teams mailing lists? maybe you also want to hand
over the administration of the mls to someone else, given you moved on
from dpmt/papt :)

Thanks,
-- 
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8869

* Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org>, 2016-09-11, 10:42:
>>Now, you've got to ask to the admin of that mailing list, which 
>>appears to be jwilk. I find that particularly interesting, given that 
>>afaik he left the team some time ago.

Yeah, that's bizarre.

>>I don't know whether anybody else knows the administration password 
>>other than him.

When I reset the password back in 2013, I sent it to all the DPMT 
admins.[0]

>Hey jwilk, would you be able to disable the suspend membership upon 
>bounces on the python teams mailing lists?

No, I'm too lazy.

>maybe you also want to hand over the administration of the mls to 
>someone else, given you moved on from dpmt/papt :)

Very gladly! Now we only need this "someone else". Last time[1] I asked 
the DPMT admins to take over the list admin duties, there were no 
replies.


[0] <20130411191230.GA678@jwilk.net>
[1] <20150410194600.GA306@jwilk.net>

-- 
Jakub Wilk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web