[sf-lug] MEGA Invitation

[jim]

Thanks for the reply.

     You're correct as to the Mailman admin access.
LX Rudis used to help out and may also have the
means of access, but I'm sure he's too busy to
muck around with our Mailman system.

     To manage our Mailman system, I respond to
notices of messages waiting for approval (usually
ignore less than a few, respond instantly to more
than a dozen). The usual action is to drop (and
delete) messages from unsubscribed email addresses.
This is the only action I've taken in the last
many months.
     Rarely, and not for many months, is there any
other action to take (allow or reply off list to
subscribers submitting too-large messages).

     If I've gone craxy, that might explain things.
     If I'm not crazy, then I assure you that I have
not permitted anything through Mailman to the list
for nearly (or maybe more than) a year.
     I'm still thinking that somehow Jason has in
his local or personal cloud storage some of the
SF-LUG email addresses.


On 07/28/2016 09:53 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Jim Stockford (jim at well.com):
>
>>      I, jim, had nothing at all to do with this.
> I believe you.  But then we have a small mystery.
>
>>      Note that I try to be particularly polite
>> and responsible in using other people's stuff
>> such as your machine (of which I am regularly
>> mindful); my rule is to treat borrow stuff
>> better than I treat my own, no carelessness
>> allowed.
>>      I'm interested in knowing of any clues that
>> led you to think so.
> Ah, that's easy to explain:  Because to my knowledge the only people
> who've been told the listadmin password for sf-lug at linuxmafia.com are
> you, the sole listadmin, and me, the owner/operator of the host.  Has,
> perhaps, it been passed along to anyone else?
>
> The spam in question arrived from a non-subscribed address.  Mailman is
> configured to hold in the admin queue any mail having a non-subscribed
> address in the 'From:' header.  (Admin setting 'Action to take for
> postings from non-members for which no explicit action is defined' is
> set to 'Hold'.)  The non-subscribed address isn't in the small roster of
> exception addresses permitted to address the mailing list without being
> subscribed.
>
> To the best of my ability to tell, therefore, the only way that this
> marketing spam could have been transmitted to the membership is for
> someone with the admin password to manually approve it from the queue.
> Thus my comments.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
>