Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #264965 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-12-20 14:00 +0100 |
| Last post | 2023-12-21 02:40 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 82 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 14:00 +0100
Re: lists Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-20 14:10 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 14:40 +0100
Re: lists Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-20 14:50 +0100
Re: lists <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-20 14:50 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 16:10 +0100
Re: lists Christoph Brinkhaus <c.brinkhaus@t-online.de> - 2023-12-20 16:20 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 16:20 +0100
Re: lists Christoph Brinkhaus <c.brinkhaus@t-online.de> - 2023-12-20 16:30 +0100
Re: lists Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d63c@ewoof.net> - 2023-12-20 16:50 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 16:30 +0100
Re: lists Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-12-20 16:40 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 16:50 +0100
Re: lists Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-20 17:00 +0100
Re: lists Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-12-20 17:00 +0100
Re: lists "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2023-12-20 17:30 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 17:40 +0100
Re: lists Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-20 17:00 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 17:10 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 17:20 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 17:20 +0100
Re: lists <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-20 17:30 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 17:40 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 17:40 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 17:50 +0100
Re: lists <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-20 17:50 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 17:50 +0100
Re: lists Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-20 18:00 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 18:10 +0100
Re: lists Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d63c@ewoof.net> - 2023-12-20 19:30 +0100
Re: lists Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-20 17:50 +0100
Re: lists Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-20 17:40 +0100
Re: lists <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-20 17:50 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 18:10 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 17:50 +0100
Re: lists Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-12-20 19:30 +0100
Re: lists Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-20 17:40 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 17:40 +0100
Re: lists Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2023-12-20 17:00 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 17:20 +0100
Re: lists <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-12-20 17:30 +0100
Re: lists Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2023-12-20 17:50 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 18:00 +0100
Re: lists Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2023-12-20 18:00 +0100
Re: lists gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-12-20 18:00 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 18:10 +0100
Re: lists Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-12-20 19:20 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 19:30 +0100
Re: lists Hanno 'Rince' Wagner <wagner@debian.org> - 2023-12-20 19:50 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 20:10 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 20:20 +0100
Re: lists Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-12-20 21:00 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 21:10 +0100
Re: lists Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2023-12-20 21:30 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-20 21:50 +0100
Re: lists gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-12-21 00:00 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 00:20 +0100
Re: lists John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2023-12-21 00:50 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 01:00 +0100
Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2023-12-21 11:40 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 11:50 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-21 12:40 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 13:40 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Byung-Hee HWANG <soyeomul@doraji.xyz> - 2023-12-21 14:20 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-21 14:50 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 15:00 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-12-21 15:10 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Hanno 'Rince' Wagner <wagner@debian.org> - 2023-12-21 15:20 +0100
Re: Could we please cease this thread now? [WAS Re: lists] Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 15:30 +0100
Re: lists gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-12-20 23:40 +0100
Re: lists Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 00:00 +0100
Re: lists Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2023-12-21 00:10 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist (was: lists) Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2023-12-21 01:50 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2023-12-21 01:50 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 02:10 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-12-21 02:50 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 03:30 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2023-12-21 05:30 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2023-12-21 05:20 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 02:00 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2023-12-21 02:30 +0100
Re: wireless broadband providers exist Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> - 2023-12-21 02:40 +0100
Page 1 of 5 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 14:00 +0100 |
| Subject | lists |
| Message-ID | <HN4l3-eRtO-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
which pocket@columbus.rr.com -- Hindi madali ang maging ako
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 14:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN4uK-eRML-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264965 |
Hi, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > which pocket@columbus.rr.com Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these administrative commands should go to the mailing list software at <majordomo@lists.debian.org>, not to debian-user@, which is the list itself and its thousands of subscribers. (A pity the list software does not automatically hold mails with administrative commands in them, like Mailman does.) Thanks, Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 14:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN4XM-eS0d-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264966 |
On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: >> which pocket@columbus.rr.com > Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these administrative > commands should go to the mailing list software at > <majordomo@lists.debian.org>, not to debian-user@, which is the list > itself and its thousands of subscribers. > > (A pity the list software does not automatically hold mails with > administrative commands in them, like Mailman does.) > > Thanks, > Andy > Every 60 days I get kicked from this list which I receive an email stating my kick value is 2%. I then try to see if I am subscribed by the web and sending emails to the majordomo@lists.debian.org which fails, trying to subscribe from the web gets me gateway errors.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 14:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN57r-eS3j-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264969 |
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:13:12AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: > > these administrative commands should go to the mailing list > > software at <majordomo@lists.debian.org>, not to debian-user@, > > which is the list itself and its thousands of subscribers. […] > Every 60 days I get kicked from this list which I receive an email stating > my kick value is 2%. > > I then try to see if I am subscribed by the web and sending emails to the > > majordomo@lists.debian.org which fails, > > trying to subscribe from the web gets me gateway errors. I think it would probably be best to report those problems to <listmaster@lists.debian.org> (read by humans) if you are able to, or to <postmaster@debian.org> failing that. It sounds like there may be some sort of administrative block or other communications problem between the Debian servers and you. The mailing list software will automatically unsubscribe you if it receives bounces when sending you email. There is not really anything that us subscribers to the lists can do to help with this sort of thing. Thanks, Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 14:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN57r-eS3j-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264969 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:13:12AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > > On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:38:49AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > > > which pocket@columbus.rr.com > > Not sure what you're trying to achieve but these administrative > > commands should go to the mailing list software at > > <majordomo@lists.debian.org>, not to debian-user@, which is the list > > itself and its thousands of subscribers. > > > > (A pity the list software does not automatically hold mails with > > administrative commands in them, like Mailman does.) > > > > Thanks, > > Andy > > > > Every 60 days I get kicked from this list which I receive an email stating > my kick value is 2%. > > I then try to see if I am subscribed by the web and sending emails to the > > majordomo@lists.debian.org which fails, > > trying to subscribe from the web gets me gateway errors. And sending majordomo commands to the mailing list itself gets you angry fellows. Alas, it seems you can't win! Have you researched /why/ you "get kicked"? Barring active admin intervention, the most probable cause seems to be that your mail provider bounces list mails. After some number of bounces, the list software gives up, as it should. Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 16:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN6mR-eT1y-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264969 |
Am 20.12.2023 um 13:39:04 Uhr schrieb Brad Rogers: > You don't need to be subbed to post to the list. Of course, you won't > receive any posts from the list. He can read that list via Usenet because it is gatewayed to it, nobody will block the messages there.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christoph Brinkhaus <c.brinkhaus@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 16:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN6wx-eT5d-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264969 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Am Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:13:12AM -0500 schrieb Pocket: > > On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: [...] > Every 60 days I get kicked from this list which I receive an email stating > my kick value is 2%. I receive this mails, too. The first impression is scary, but in the body there is an explanation. The statement is that there are some bounces but your account will be deleted if the kick rate exceeds a limit much higher than 2%. AFAIR the limit is 80% so so. I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting the next contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. I am not sure if this is 100% true or related to your situation. Please verify the content of the kick rate mail. I am quite sure that it is not as serious as it sounds on the first impression. Kind regards, Christoph -- Ist die Katze gesund schmeckt sie dem Hund.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 16:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN6wx-eT5d-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264975 |
Am 20.12.2023 um 16:11:05 Uhr schrieb Christoph Brinkhaus: > I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big > mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting > the next contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. Do they reject with 5xx or 4xx?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christoph Brinkhaus <c.brinkhaus@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 16:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN6Ge-eT8j-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264977 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Am Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 04:14:57PM +0100 schrieb Marco Moock: > Am 20.12.2023 um 16:11:05 Uhr schrieb Christoph Brinkhaus: > > > I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big > > mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting > > the next contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. > > Do they reject with 5xx or 4xx? > Honestly I do not know. Kind regards, Christoph
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d63c@ewoof.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 16:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN6Zz-eTeL-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264977 |
On 20 Dec 2023 16:14 +0100, from mm@dorfdsl.de (Marco Moock): >> I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big >> mail providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting >> the next contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. > > Do they reject with 5xx or 4xx? I suspect that is in reference to greylisting, in which case it absolutely should be a 4xx temporary reject. The idea being that legitimate SMTP clients will retry later in response to a 4xx. Though big providers have probably moved on toward making decisions based on IP reputation rather than whether some system retries after some indeterminable delay. -- Michael Kjörling 🔗 https://michael.kjorling.se “Remember when, on the Internet, nobody cared that you were a dog?”
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 16:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN6Ge-eT8j-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264975 |
On 12/20/23 10:11, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote: > Am Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:13:12AM -0500 schrieb Pocket: >> On 12/20/23 07:59, Andy Smith wrote: > [...] > >> Every 60 days I get kicked from this list which I receive an email stating >> my kick value is 2%. > I receive this mails, too. The first impression is scary, but in the > body there is an explanation. The statement is that there are some > bounces but your account will be deleted if the kick rate exceeds a > limit much higher than 2%. AFAIR the limit is 80% so so. > > I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big mail > providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting the next > contact. Most spammers seem to try just once. > > I am not sure if this is 100% true or related to your situation. > Please verify the content of the kick rate mail. I am quite sure that it > is not as serious as it sounds on the first impression. > > Kind regards, > Christoph I think you missed my point. I get/have a kick rate of 2% (one bounce in the last 60 days), then I am kicked and no longer receive anything from the user list. After many attempts over several days....... I finally get email from majordomo@lists.debian.org that tells me this You are subscribed to the following lists: List Address ==== ======= debian-arm pocket@columbus.rr.com debian-security-announce pocket@columbus.rr.com I spend several days trying to subscribed to the list, with the web signup ALWAYS time out with a gateway error. I than spend hours trying to get majordomo@lists.debian.org to reply. emails to the list maintainer either are not delivered(black hole?) or I get not response. As you see I have now reestablished my subscription to this list, which if past practice is any indicator I will get banned again in 30 days for email bounces. Of which I have zero control over. PS. pretty hard to debug this when you receive no responses from majordomo@lists.debian.org or the list maintainer as you have nothing to look at or to work with. -- Hindi madali ang maging ako
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 16:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN6PT-eTbx-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264980 |
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:28 AM Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> wrote: > > [...] > > I get/have a kick rate of 2% (one bounce in the last 60 days), then I am > kicked and no longer receive anything from the user list. > > After many attempts over several days....... > > I finally get email from majordomo@lists.debian.org that tells me this > > You are subscribed to the following lists: > > List Address > ==== ======= > debian-arm pocket@columbus.rr.com > debian-security-announce pocket@columbus.rr.com > > I spend several days trying to subscribed to the list, with the web > signup ALWAYS time out with a gateway error. > > I than spend hours trying to get majordomo@lists.debian.org to reply. > > emails to the list maintainer either are not delivered(black hole?) or I > get not response. For the gateway errors and majordomo delays, you should probably contact <listmaster@lists.debian.org>. Also see <https://www.debian.org/contact>. Jeff
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 16:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN6Zz-eTeL-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264982 |
On 12/20/23 10:35, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:28 AM Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> wrote: >> [...] >> >> I get/have a kick rate of 2% (one bounce in the last 60 days), then I am >> kicked and no longer receive anything from the user list. >> >> After many attempts over several days....... >> >> I finally get email from majordomo@lists.debian.org that tells me this >> >> You are subscribed to the following lists: >> >> List Address >> ==== ======= >> debian-arm pocket@columbus.rr.com >> debian-security-announce pocket@columbus.rr.com >> >> I spend several days trying to subscribed to the list, with the web >> signup ALWAYS time out with a gateway error. >> >> I than spend hours trying to get majordomo@lists.debian.org to reply. >> >> emails to the list maintainer either are not delivered(black hole?) or I >> get not response. > For the gateway errors and majordomo delays, you should probably > contact <listmaster@lists.debian.org>. Also see > <https://www.debian.org/contact>. > > Jeff > That goes without any response, I can not tell if the email was delivered or ignored. So that is a negative, as it results in nothing. -- Hindi madali ang maging ako
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 17:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN79f-eTir-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264983 |
Hello, On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:43:04AM -0500, Pocket wrote: > On 12/20/23 10:35, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > For the gateway errors and majordomo delays, you should probably > > contact <listmaster@lists.debian.org>. Also see > > <https://www.debian.org/contact>. > > That goes without any response, I can not tell if the email was delivered or > ignored. > > So that is a negative, as it results in nothing. Unfortunately I don't think there is anyone else here that can help you. I forwarded your mail to listmaster@lists.debian.org myself in case there is some problem that is causing your own emails to be discarded. Myself I have had pretty good response time from the humans behind listmaster@lists.debian.org whenever I've had cause to contact them. Thanks, Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 17:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN79f-eTir-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264983 |
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:43 AM Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> wrote: > > > On 12/20/23 10:35, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:28 AM Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> wrote: > >> [...] > >> > >> I get/have a kick rate of 2% (one bounce in the last 60 days), then I am > >> kicked and no longer receive anything from the user list. > >> > >> After many attempts over several days....... > >> > >> I finally get email from majordomo@lists.debian.org that tells me this > >> > >> You are subscribed to the following lists: > >> > >> List Address > >> ==== ======= > >> debian-arm pocket@columbus.rr.com > >> debian-security-announce pocket@columbus.rr.com > >> > >> I spend several days trying to subscribed to the list, with the web > >> signup ALWAYS time out with a gateway error. > >> > >> I than spend hours trying to get majordomo@lists.debian.org to reply. > >> > >> emails to the list maintainer either are not delivered(black hole?) or I > >> get not response. > > For the gateway errors and majordomo delays, you should probably > > contact <listmaster@lists.debian.org>. Also see > > <https://www.debian.org/contact>. > > That goes without any response, I can not tell if the email was > delivered or ignored. > > So that is a negative, as it results in nothing. You have to give them more than 15 minutes. Jeff
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 17:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN7Ci-eTJ1-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264980 |
Hi,
(Cc-ing pocket@columbus.rr.com just in case the unsubscription strikes
again.)
Pocket wrote:
> I spend several days trying to subscribed to the list, with the web signup
> ALWAYS time out with a gateway error.
The mails from the list have these informational headers:
List-Subscribe:
<mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Unsubscribe:
<mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=unsubscribe>
So to subscribe, send a mail to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with the Subject: text "subscribe".
> I get/have a kick rate of 2% (one bounce in the last 60 days), then I am
> kicked and no longer receive anything from the user list.
It is possible that these warning mails and the final unsubscription
are not directly related.
A while ago this list had a problem with fake bounces. A troll managed
to convince the list server that some of the subscribers would reject the
list mails. I am not familiar with the exact technical properties of that
attack and how it was finally disabled by the listmasters.
It was in october 2021. See the threads under:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/10/msg00248.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/10/msg00337.html
I became target after complaining that i was not deemed hateworthy enough
to become a victim (and showing an example of a real bounce):
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/10/msg00434.html
The problem ended after a preliminary change:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/10/msg00567.html
"We now disabled bounce-detection if it is related to that.
We'll check how to be more strict in accepting these kind of mails
now.
Yours, Cord, Debian Listmaster of the day"
I guess that this change was later revoked after means were found to
recognize the fake bounce mails.
Maybe now the attack was refined ? Maybe i will be the next victim ?
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 17:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN7LY-eTM7-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264995 |
Am 20.12.2023 um 17:26:25 Uhr schrieb Thomas Schmitt: > A while ago this list had a problem with fake bounces. A troll managed > to convince the list server that some of the subscribers would reject > the list mails. I am not familiar with the exact technical properties > of that attack and how it was finally disabled by the listmasters. Bounces go to the address in the Return-Path header Return-Path: <bounce-debian-user=mm=dorfdsl.de@lists.debian.org> As you can see the address is unique to the subscriber. You can look how normal bounce look like and send such a message to the address in Return-Path. One possibility to mitigate that is to check SPF of the domain of the included address, in that example the list server could check of the server sending the bounce is listed in the SPF of dorfdsl.de - and if not - reject the message.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 17:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN79f-eTir-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264975 |
Hello,
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 04:11:05PM +0100, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote:
> I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big mail
> providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting the next
> contact. Most spammers seem to try just once.
I think you are talking about the practice of "greylisting". This
involves giving a 4xx SMTP response to "new" correspondents, which
is a temporary failure code that instructs the sending server to try
again later. They usually will within just a few minutes, at which
point it's not considered a "new" interaction and is allowed
through.
The purpose of this is to weed out compromised hosts sending email
directly, rather than through a proper mail server. Such malware
usually won't bother to implement a full mail server with queueing
and retries, so will give up after even a temporary failure.
There was a period of time when large spam runs using compromised
hosts were prevalent, but in recent years spammers do tend to use
rented hosts with proper mail servers on them, so greylisting has
become less effective. Some people say it no longer has any
noticeable benefit.
Greylisting would not cause the symptoms that you and Pocket are
experiencing; any sensible mailing list server including Debian's
will cope with temporary failure.
If we're not talking about greylisting, using a 5xx SMTP hard reject
code on new interactions would not make a lot of sense as a form of
antispam measure. There are some misguided people who use a sort of
allowlist approach where every new correspondent gets an automated
message telling them to visit a URL to prove they are human, before
any mail is allowed through to the real recipient. These use
non-delivery report emails ("bounces", NDRs) as opposed to SMTP
rejects.
If I were you I'd just email <listmaster@lists.debian.org> to ask
them about it the next time you receive the notification about some
emails being rejected. The human that will eventually answer your
email will probably be happy to look in the logs to see what message
your mail provider gave.
> Please verify the content of the kick rate mail. I am quite sure that it
> is not as serious as it sounds on the first impression.
You are right that an occasional bounce probably isn't a lot to
worry about, as the trigger level indeed is way above 2%. One way it
can happen is if a spammy message reaches the list and is not
detected by Debian, but is detected and rejected by your mail
provider. That counts as "you" rejecting email from the list, even
though that was the right thing for your provider to do. That sort
of thing can just be ignored.
In Pocket's case, they say they are actually being automatically
unsubscribed from the list. That indicates a severe and ongoing
problem with their mail delivery. If I were them I'd want to look
into it.
Thanks,
Andy
--
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pocket <pocket@columbus.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 17:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN7iV-eTC2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264985 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 12/20/23 10:50, Andy Smith wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 04:11:05PM +0100, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote:
>> I have heard that there is a countermeasure against spam run be big mail
>> providers by rejecting the first contact by SMTP and accepting the next
>> contact. Most spammers seem to try just once.
> I think you are talking about the practice of "greylisting". This
> involves giving a 4xx SMTP response to "new" correspondents, which
> is a temporary failure code that instructs the sending server to try
> again later. They usually will within just a few minutes, at which
> point it's not considered a "new" interaction and is allowed
> through.
>
> The purpose of this is to weed out compromised hosts sending email
> directly, rather than through a proper mail server. Such malware
> usually won't bother to implement a full mail server with queueing
> and retries, so will give up after even a temporary failure.
>
> There was a period of time when large spam runs using compromised
> hosts were prevalent, but in recent years spammers do tend to use
> rented hosts with proper mail servers on them, so greylisting has
> become less effective. Some people say it no longer has any
> noticeable benefit.
>
> Greylisting would not cause the symptoms that you and Pocket are
> experiencing; any sensible mailing list server including Debian's
> will cope with temporary failure.
>
> If we're not talking about greylisting, using a 5xx SMTP hard reject
> code on new interactions would not make a lot of sense as a form of
> antispam measure. There are some misguided people who use a sort of
> allowlist approach where every new correspondent gets an automated
> message telling them to visit a URL to prove they are human, before
> any mail is allowed through to the real recipient. These use
> non-delivery report emails ("bounces", NDRs) as opposed to SMTP
> rejects.
>
> If I were you I'd just email<listmaster@lists.debian.org> to ask
> them about it the next time you receive the notification about some
> emails being rejected. The human that will eventually answer your
> email will probably be happy to look in the logs to see what message
> your mail provider gave.
>
>> Please verify the content of the kick rate mail. I am quite sure that it
>> is not as serious as it sounds on the first impression.
> You are right that an occasional bounce probably isn't a lot to
> worry about, as the trigger level indeed is way above 2%. One way it
> can happen is if a spammy message reaches the list and is not
> detected by Debian, but is detected and rejected by your mail
> provider. That counts as "you" rejecting email from the list, even
> though that was the right thing for your provider to do. That sort
> of thing can just be ignored.
>
> In Pocket's case, they say they are actually being automatically
> unsubscribed from the list. That indicates a severe and ongoing
> problem with their mail delivery. If I were them I'd want to look
> into it.
>
> Thanks,
> Andy
I am looking into it,
The other debian mail lists I subscrie to are not and never have been an
issue.
I did find this which points to the debian mail list SMTP server
inal-Recipient: rfc822;pocket@columbus.rr.com
Original-Recipient:rfc822;pocket@columbus.rr.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.0
Remote-MTA: dns; pkvw-mx.msg.pkvw.co.charter.net
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 5.1.0
<bounce-debian-user=pocket=columbus.rr.com@lists.debian.org> sender
rejected. Please see
https://www.spectrum.net/support/internet/understanding-email-error-codes
for more information. AUP#In-1310
Error code AUP#In-1310 is the following
Spectrum limits the number of concurrent connections from a sender, as
well as the total number of connections allowed. Limits vary based on
the reputation of the IP address. Reduce your number of connections and
try again later.
--
Hindi madali ang maging ako
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-12-20 17:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HN7sB-eTFK-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #264989 |
Am 20.12.2023 um 11:07:16 Uhr schrieb Pocket: > Spectrum limits the number of concurrent connections from a sender, > as well as the total number of connections allowed. Limits vary based > on the reputation of the IP address. Reduce your number of > connections and try again later. You can't fix that until you make your mail provider change those policies. The operator of the sending MTA for the Debian lists can limit the amount of connections to spectrum, talk to the postmasters there if you think the might implement that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 5 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web