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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #264036 > unrolled thread

Mailing List

Started byPocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com>
First post2023-12-01 16:30 +0100
Last post2023-12-02 21:50 +0100
Articles 12 — 7 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Mailing List Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-01 16:30 +0100
    Re: Mailing List piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2023-12-01 16:30 +0100
      Re: Mailing List <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-01 17:20 +0100
        Re: Mailing List piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2023-12-01 21:50 +0100
          Re: Mailing List tomas@tuxteam.de - 2023-12-02 07:00 +0100
          Re: Mailing List David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-12-05 04:00 +0100
    Re: Mailing List "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2023-12-01 17:30 +0100
      Re: Mailing List David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-12-03 05:30 +0100
        Re: Mailing List "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2023-12-03 10:00 +0100
          Re: Mailing List David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-12-05 04:00 +0100
    Re: Mailing List debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2023-12-01 17:40 +0100
      Re: Mailing List Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-02 21:50 +0100

#264036 — Mailing List

FromPocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com>
Date2023-12-01 16:30 +0100
SubjectMailing List
Message-ID<HGdCN-anpf-3@gated-at.bofh.it>

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

Anyone one else having trouble with the mailing list?

Have received any messages since Nov 30

I can not tell if I am still subscribed

I get


  Error: Overload

On the https://lists.debian.org/users.html page


-- 
It's not easy to be me

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#264037

Frompiorunz <piorunz@gmx.com>
Date2023-12-01 16:30 +0100
Message-ID<HGdCN-anpf-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264036
On 01/12/2023 15:05, Pocket wrote:
> Anyone one else having trouble with the mailing list?
> 
> Have received any messages since Nov 30
> 
> I can not tell if I am still subscribed

Your message is here, so you are subscribed :)

-- 
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

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

#264042

From<tomas@tuxteam.de>
Date2023-12-01 17:20 +0100
Message-ID<HGepc-anW0-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264037

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

On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 03:24:33PM +0000, piorunz wrote:
> On 01/12/2023 15:05, Pocket wrote:
> > Anyone one else having trouble with the mailing list?
> > 
> > Have received any messages since Nov 30
> > 
> > I can not tell if I am still subscribed
> 
> Your message is here, so you are subscribed :)

Not necessarily, you can post here as a non-subscriber. Actually I have
the hunch that the OP is not subscribed (going by the X-Spam-Status header).

Cheers
-- 
t

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

#264065

Frompiorunz <piorunz@gmx.com>
Date2023-12-01 21:50 +0100
Message-ID<HGiCu-aqey-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264042
On 01/12/2023 16:15, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

>> Your message is here, so you are subscribed :)
>
> Not necessarily, you can post here as a non-subscriber. Actually I have
> the hunch that the OP is not subscribed (going by the X-Spam-Status header).
>
> Cheers

Oh, ok, I didn't know that. That's why the group receives so much spam
lol -_-


--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

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

#264090

Fromtomas@tuxteam.de
Date2023-12-02 07:00 +0100
Message-ID<HGrcJ-avrl-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264065

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

On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 08:39:51PM +0000, piorunz wrote:
> On 01/12/2023 16:15, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
> > > Your message is here, so you are subscribed :)
> > 
> > Not necessarily, you can post here as a non-subscriber. Actually I have
> > the hunch that the OP is not subscribed (going by the X-Spam-Status header).
> > 
> > Cheers
> 
> Oh, ok, I didn't know that. That's why the group receives so much spam
> lol -_-

I think this is unfair: given the list's volume (~3k members, ~0.5k posts
per month) I find spam ratio to be no less than stellar. I'm sure there is
quite a bit of quiet work behind the scenes to keep things running *that*
smoothly.

Keeping the list open to non-subscribers goes a long way of making Debian
itself open, so I understand and support that decision.

Cheers
-- 
t

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

#264264

FromDavid Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Date2023-12-05 04:00 +0100
Message-ID<HHtPb-bfgU-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264065
On Fri 01 Dec 2023 at 20:39:51 (+0000), piorunz wrote:
> On 01/12/2023 16:15, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
> > > Your message is here, so you are subscribed :)
> > 
> > Not necessarily, you can post here as a non-subscriber. Actually I have
> > the hunch that the OP is not subscribed (going by the X-Spam-Status header).
> > 
> > Cheers
> 
> Oh, ok, I didn't know that. That's why the group receives so much spam
> lol -_-

Almost all the spam I receive addressed to deblis@… has not come
from the list server: the address deblis@… has been harvested.
Currently they're translators and cushions; last month I'd won
tens of millions of dollars many times over, from a slew of slebs.
And there's the perennial trickle of mailbox-full/hacked/expired
phishing expeditions. I don't blame the list admins.

Cheers,
David.

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

#264043

From"Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net>
Date2023-12-01 17:30 +0100
Message-ID<HGeyR-anWH-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264036
Hi,

> Anyone one else having trouble with the mailing list?

I got your message via the list.

> Have received any messages since Nov 30

Normal traffic yesterday and today, i'd say.

> I can not tell if I am still subscribed

The "From:" address pocket@columbus.rr.com seems not to be recognized as
being subscribed.
The message to which i reply bears no "LDOSUBSCRIBER":

  X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.7 required=4.0 tests=CAPINIT,HTML_MESSAGE,
    KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS,LDO_WHITELIST,META_ATTENDEES_DBSPAM1,
    RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
    version=3.4.2

Unlike examples of other messages from other sender to the list:

  X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.7 required=4.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
    FOURLA,LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
    T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,WORD_WITHOUT_VOWELS autolearn=unavailable
    autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2

  X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.7 required=4.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
    DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2,FOURLA,FREEMAIL_FROM,
    HTML_MESSAGE,LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
    RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable
    autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2

  X-Spam-Status: No,
    score=-10.5 required=4.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,
    FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LDOSUBSCRIBER,
    LDO_WHITELIST,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable
    autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2

> I get
>                               Error: Overload
> On the https://lists.debian.org/users.html [lists.debian.org] page

That's quite a long page.
Try
  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/
  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2023/12/threads.html
and your message at
  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2023/12/msg00028.html


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

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

#264129

FromDavid Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Date2023-12-03 05:30 +0100
Message-ID<HGMhb-aIeT-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264043
On Fri 01 Dec 2023 at 17:24:53 (+0100), Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> 
> > Anyone one else having trouble with the mailing list?
> 
> I got your message via the list.
> 
> > Have received any messages since Nov 30
> 
> Normal traffic yesterday and today, i'd say.
> 
> > I can not tell if I am still subscribed
> 
> The "From:" address pocket@columbus.rr.com seems not to be recognized as
> being subscribed.
> The message to which i reply bears no "LDOSUBSCRIBER":
> 
>   X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.7 required=4.0 tests=CAPINIT,HTML_MESSAGE,
>     KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS,LDO_WHITELIST,META_ATTENDEES_DBSPAM1,
>     RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
>     version=3.4.2
> 
> Unlike examples of other messages from other sender to the list:
> 
>   X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.7 required=4.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
>     FOURLA,LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
>     T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,WORD_WITHOUT_VOWELS autolearn=unavailable
>     autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
> 
>   X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.7 required=4.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
>     DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2,FOURLA,FREEMAIL_FROM,
>     HTML_MESSAGE,LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
>     RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable
>     autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
> 
>   X-Spam-Status: No,
>     score=-10.5 required=4.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,
>     FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LDOSUBSCRIBER,
>     LDO_WHITELIST,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable
>     autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2

I'm subscribed, but I don't receive that badge of honour.
This is from my other post in this thread—no LDOSUBSCRIBER:

>   X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=4.0 tests=CAPINIT,FOURLA,
>     HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LDO_WHITELIST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
>     T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
>     version=3.4.2

I'm guessing your last example is Curt's. The only occurrence of
the From: address in the entire email is in the From: line.
That's no different from my own post, except for the lines at the
very top, which show my post being delivered to me.

I had thought the server was using the envelope-from in order to
identify subscribers, yet Curt's posts, like mine, have different
envelope-from and From: addresses, which is presumably the reason
behind HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS.

Cheers,
David.

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

#264144

From"Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net>
Date2023-12-03 10:00 +0100
Message-ID<HGQut-aKHp-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264129
Hi,

David Wright wrote:
> I'm subscribed, but I don't receive that badge of honour.
> This is from my other post in this thread—no LDOSUBSCRIBER:
>
> >   X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=4.0 tests=CAPINIT,FOURLA,
> >     HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LDO_WHITELIST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
> >     T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
> >     version=3.4.2

This is known to happen if the mail is sent from an address that is different
from the subscribed mail address. Maybe you discovered a new cause.


> I'm guessing your last example is Curt's.
> >   X-Spam-Status: No,
> >     score=-10.5 required=4.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,
> >     FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LDOSUBSCRIBER,
> >     LDO_WHITELIST,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable
> >     autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2

Yes. It's from:

  Subject: Re: rhs time out error?
  Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 16:30:02 -0000 (UTC)
  Message-ID: <slrnum6ska.1gl.curty@einstein.electron.org>

> The only occurrence of
> the From: address in the entire email is in the From: line.
> That's no different from my own post, except for the lines at the
> very top, which show my post being delivered to me.
>
> I had thought the server was using the envelope-from in order to
> identify subscribers, yet Curt's posts, like mine, have different
> envelope-from and From: addresses, which is presumably the reason
> behind HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS.

HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS would have been my first suspicion, too.
But i see no "envelope-from" Curt's mail and yours.
Only
  Envelope-To: <scdbackup@gmx.net>
(If "envelope-from" is a typo and "Envelope-To:" differs from "From:",
then we'd probably have the situation of different sender and receiver.)


It would be interesting to see all "Received:" headers of your own
mail when it arrives back to you. I see in your mail to which i now reply:

  Received: from bendel.debian.org ([82.195.75.100]) by mx-ha.gmx.net
    (mxgmx109
 [212.227.17.5]) with ESMTPS (Nemesis) id 1MZzsi-1qmfcQ0kRo-00R0wN for
 <scdbackup@gmx.net>; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 05:24:06 +0100
  Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with QMQP
    id 0F8C9209D5; Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:23:55 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0413D20837
    for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>; Sun,
    3 Dec 2023 04:23:42 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from bendel.debian.org ([127.0.0.1])
    by localhost (lists.debian.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 2525)
    with ESMTP id 1Ym_tsLfWzf6 for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>;
    Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:23:33 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from omta012.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net
    (omta012.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net [35.164.127.235])
    (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
    (Client CN "Client", Issuer "CA" (not verified))
    by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A7BD209C6
    for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Sun,
    3 Dec 2023 04:23:32 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from cxr.smtp.a.cloudfilter.net ([10.0.16.145])
    by cmsmtp with ESMTP
    id 9deErTpHpaga99e0vrCJA8; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 04:23:29 +0000
  Received: from axis.corp ([68.102.133.185])
    by cmsmtp with ESMTPSA
    id 9e0srwhHYTywR9e0urtWnm; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 04:23:29 +0000

All these headers except the first were added on the sender side, i.e
on the list server bendel.debian.org and in your mail provider's realm.

In a mail of mine to this list i see:

  Received: from bendel.debian.org ([82.195.75.100]) by mx-ha.gmx.net
    (mxgmx009
    [212.227.15.9]) with ESMTPS (Nemesis) id 1MMYsv-1qsRpG2aBT-00SPIm for
    <scdbackup@gmx.net>; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 21:11:45 +0100
  Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with QMQP
    id 869AC20BB3; Fri,  1 Dec 2023 20:11:33 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 920DB20B9A
    for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>; Fri,
    1 Dec 2023 20:11:22 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from bendel.debian.org ([127.0.0.1])
    by localhost (lists.debian.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 2525)
    with ESMTP id g1fSuxvi8ZX9 for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>;
    Fri,  1 Dec 2023 20:11:19 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15])
    (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
     key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)
    server-digest SHA256)
    (Client did not present a certificate)
    by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14F4520A27
    for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Fri,
    1 Dec 2023 20:11:19 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from scdbackup.webframe.org ([91.8.169.164]) by mail.gmx.net
    (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id
    1Mqs0R-1reJbZ24e1-00mwgO for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Fri,
    01 Dec 2023 21:11:16 +0100

So there is one mail relay hop more on your side, before the mail reaches
the Debian list server. I wonder whether this earns you the spam test
attribute HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS which i don't get in my mails:

  X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.0 required=4.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
    DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,
    RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,
    T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
    version=3.4.2


Whatever, if i see no LDOSUBSCRIBER in a thread-starting mail from somebody
who not frequently replys to list mails, then i mildly violate the rules
by adding a Cc: to my reply. Just to be sure that it reaches the thread
starter.
But since this mail i'm currently writing is a tangent to the original
thread topic, i refrain from Cc-ing Pocket.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

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

#264265

FromDavid Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Date2023-12-05 04:00 +0100
Message-ID<HHtPb-bfgU-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264144
On Sun 03 Dec 2023 at 10:01:25 (+0100), Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> David Wright wrote:
> > I'm subscribed, but I don't receive that badge of honour.
> > This is from my other post in this thread—no LDOSUBSCRIBER:
> >
> > >   X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=4.0 tests=CAPINIT,FOURLA,
> > >     HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LDO_WHITELIST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
> > >     T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
> > >     version=3.4.2
> 
> This is known to happen if the mail is sent from an address that is different
> from the subscribed mail address. Maybe you discovered a new cause.
> 
> 
> > I'm guessing your last example is Curt's.
> > >   X-Spam-Status: No,
> > >     score=-10.5 required=4.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,
> > >     FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LDOSUBSCRIBER,
> > >     LDO_WHITELIST,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable
> > >     autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
> 
> Yes. It's from:
> 
>   Subject: Re: rhs time out error?
>   Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 16:30:02 -0000 (UTC)
>   Message-ID: <slrnum6ska.1gl.curty@einstein.electron.org>
> 
> > The only occurrence of
> > the From: address in the entire email is in the From: line.
> > That's no different from my own post, except for the lines at the
> > very top, which show my post being delivered to me.
> >
> > I had thought the server was using the envelope-from in order to
> > identify subscribers, yet Curt's posts, like mine, have different
> > envelope-from and From: addresses, which is presumably the reason
> > behind HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS.
> 
> HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS would have been my first suspicion, too.
> But i see no "envelope-from" Curt's mail and yours.
> Only
>   Envelope-To: <scdbackup@gmx.net>
> (If "envelope-from" is a typo and "Envelope-To:" differs from "From:",
> then we'd probably have the situation of different sender and receiver.)

As you can see from the headers I've posted below, what the
envelope-to (RCPT) gets called depends on the hosting service.
In my case, it's the X-Original-To: header. (As the list server
generates it, it won't take part in spam detection, of course.)

OTOH the envelope-from (MAIL/MAIL FROM) is, I presume, of great
interest to the spam scanners, perhaps more than the From:
address itself, because it's more likely to be checked by the mail
submission system. Curt's envelope-from is embedded in a Received:
header, pasted here with some surrounding context:

  Received: from ciao.gmane.io (ciao.gmane.io [116.202.254.214])
      (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
      key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
      (Client did not present a certificate)
      by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0D83205F2
      for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Sun, 26 Nov 2023 16:30:11 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92)
      (envelope-from <gldu-debian-user-2@m.gmane-mx.org>)
      id 1r7I1I-0001BZ-JA
      for debian-user@lists.debian.org; Sun, 26 Nov 2023 17:30:08 +0100
  X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
  To: debian-user@lists.debian.org

> It would be interesting to see all "Received:" headers of your own
> mail when it arrives back to you. I see in your mail to which i now reply:
> 
>   Received: from bendel.debian.org ([82.195.75.100]) by mx-ha.gmx.net
>     (mxgmx109
>  [212.227.17.5]) with ESMTPS (Nemesis) id 1MZzsi-1qmfcQ0kRo-00R0wN for
>  <scdbackup@gmx.net>; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 05:24:06 +0100
>   Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>     by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with QMQP
>     id 0F8C9209D5; Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:23:55 +0000 (UTC)
>   Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>     by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0413D20837
>     for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>; Sun,
>     3 Dec 2023 04:23:42 +0000 (UTC)
>   Received: from bendel.debian.org ([127.0.0.1])
>     by localhost (lists.debian.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 2525)
>     with ESMTP id 1Ym_tsLfWzf6 for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>;
>     Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:23:33 +0000 (UTC)
>   Received: from omta012.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net
>     (omta012.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net [35.164.127.235])
>     (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
>     (Client CN "Client", Issuer "CA" (not verified))
>     by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A7BD209C6
>     for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Sun,
>     3 Dec 2023 04:23:32 +0000 (UTC)
>   Received: from cxr.smtp.a.cloudfilter.net ([10.0.16.145])
>     by cmsmtp with ESMTP
>     id 9deErTpHpaga99e0vrCJA8; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 04:23:29 +0000
>   Received: from axis.corp ([68.102.133.185])
>     by cmsmtp with ESMTPSA
>     id 9e0srwhHYTywR9e0urtWnm; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 04:23:29 +0000
> 
> All these headers except the first were added on the sender side, i.e
> on the list server bendel.debian.org and in your mail provider's realm.
> 
> In a mail of mine to this list i see:
> 
>   Received: from bendel.debian.org ([82.195.75.100]) by mx-ha.gmx.net
>     (mxgmx009
>     [212.227.15.9]) with ESMTPS (Nemesis) id 1MMYsv-1qsRpG2aBT-00SPIm for
>     <scdbackup@gmx.net>; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 21:11:45 +0100
>   Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>     by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with QMQP
>     id 869AC20BB3; Fri,  1 Dec 2023 20:11:33 +0000 (UTC)
>   Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>     by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 920DB20B9A
>     for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>; Fri,
>     1 Dec 2023 20:11:22 +0000 (UTC)
>   Received: from bendel.debian.org ([127.0.0.1])
>     by localhost (lists.debian.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 2525)
>     with ESMTP id g1fSuxvi8ZX9 for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>;
>     Fri,  1 Dec 2023 20:11:19 +0000 (UTC)
>   Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15])
>     (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
>      key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)
>     server-digest SHA256)
>     (Client did not present a certificate)
>     by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14F4520A27
>     for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Fri,
>     1 Dec 2023 20:11:19 +0000 (UTC)
>   Received: from scdbackup.webframe.org ([91.8.169.164]) by mail.gmx.net
>     (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id
>     1Mqs0R-1reJbZ24e1-00mwgO for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Fri,
>     01 Dec 2023 21:11:16 +0100
> 
> So there is one mail relay hop more on your side, before the mail reaches
> the Debian list server. I wonder whether this earns you the spam test
> attribute HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS which i don't get in my mails:
> 
>   X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.0 required=4.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
>     DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,
>     RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,
>     T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
>     version=3.4.2

The headers below are from a copy of the same email as the one of mine
you quoted above, from the top down to the standard headers. (Below
those, there's another load of less interesting? stuff.) I've lightly
redacted it.

  Return-Path: <bounce-debian-user=deblis=lionunicorn.co.uk@lists.debian.org>
  X-Original-To: deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk
  Delivered-To: …@lionunicorn.co.uk
  Received: from bendel.debian.org (bendel.debian.org [82.195.75.100])
      by cloud204.unlimitedwebhosting.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3D48C22F08
      for <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>; Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:24:00 +0000 (GMT)
  Authentication-Results: cloud204.unlimitedwebhosting.co.uk;
      spf=none (sender IP is 82.195.75.100)
      smtp.mailfrom=bounce-debian-user=deblis=lionunicorn.co.uk@lists.debian.org
      smtp.helo=bendel.debian.org
  Received-SPF: none (cloud204.unlimitedwebhosting.co.uk: no valid SPF record)
  Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
      by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with QMQP
      id 0F8C9209D5; Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:23:55 +0000 (UTC)
  X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-user-request@lists.debian.org  Sun Dec  3 04:23:54 2023
  Old-Return-Path: <…xyz…@cox.net>
  X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on bendel.debian.org
  X-Spam-Level:
  X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.7 required=4.0 tests=CAPINIT,
      HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LDO_WHITELIST,META_ATTENDEES_DBSPAM1,
      RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no
      autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
  X-Original-To: lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org
  Delivered-To: lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org
  Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
      by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0413D20837
      for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>; Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:23:42 +0000 (UTC)
  X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.debian.org with policy bank en-ht
  X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.26 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3
      tests=[BAYES_00=-2, CAPINIT=0.5, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25,
      LDO_WHITELIST=-5, META_ATTENDEES_DBSPAM1=5,
      RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01]
      autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
  Received: from bendel.debian.org ([127.0.0.1])
      by localhost (lists.debian.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 2525)
      with ESMTP id 1Ym_tsLfWzf6 for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>;
      Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:23:33 +0000 (UTC)
  X-policyd-weight: using cached result; rate: -5.5
  Received: from omta012.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net (omta012.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net
      [35.164.127.235])
      (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
      (Client CN "Client", Issuer "CA" (not verified))
      by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A7BD209C6
      for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Sun,  3 Dec 2023 04:23:32 +0000 (UTC)
  Received: from cxr.smtp.a.cloudfilter.net ([10.0.16.145])
      by cmsmtp with ESMTP
      id 9deErTpHpaga99e0vrCJA8; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 04:23:29 +0000
  Received: from axis.corp ([68.102.133.185])
      by cmsmtp with ESMTPSA
      id 9e0srwhHYTywR9e0urtWnm; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 04:23:29 +0000
  Authentication-Results: cox.net; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=…xyz…@cox.net
  X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=UYJC9YeN c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=656c02c1
      a=… … …
  Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2023 22:23:26 -0600

The HELO is the name of the originating machine, here with the
IP address of the modem, and my envelope-from (MAIL FROM) is
the same as the partially redacted authentication credentials,
also shown here at Old_Return_Path:.

As far as spam detection/rejection is concerned, I've had more
trouble from spam filters on the way to debian-user than with
the list/bendel's own ones.

Cheers,
David.

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

#264045

Fromdebian-user@howorth.org.uk
Date2023-12-01 17:40 +0100
Message-ID<HGeIx-anZE-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264036
Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
> Anyone one else having trouble with the mailing list?
> 
> Have received any messages since Nov 30
> 
> I can not tell if I am still subscribed
> 
> I get
> 
>   Error: Overload
> 
> On the https://lists.debian.org/users.html page

Your message made it to the list. Various people commented and you can
see them in the archive as well as your own post at:

https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/14a3f8ab-8475-45c2-ae1c-b05ab135c737@columbus.rr.com

FWIW, I haven't noticed anything strange but I haven't been observing
closely.

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

#264117

FromPocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com>
Date2023-12-02 21:50 +0100
Message-ID<HGF61-aDPx-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#264045

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

On 12/1/23 11:36, debian-user@howorth.org.uk wrote:
> Pocket<pocket@columbus.rr.com>  wrote:
>> Anyone one else having trouble with the mailing list?
>>
>> Have received any messages since Nov 30
>>
>> I can not tell if I am still subscribed
>>
>> I get
>>
>>    Error: Overload
>>
>> On thehttps://lists.debian.org/users.html  page


Looks like I was dropped from the list

It took me awhile to figure out but here is what I found


Send an email to: majordomo@lists.debian.org

which <email address>

in the message body

That will show what you are subscribed to

Then send and email to: majordomo@lists.debian.org

subscribe <email address>

in the message body

And you should get conformation.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web