Dear Mark, thanks for your interest.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022, Mark Sapiro wrote:
This may actually be a bug. I'll have to think about that. I've filed https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/issues/978 on this.
This is https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/issues/794 (still open)
Given the time needed to solve the issues (I will anyhow notify the site administrators, hopting they would update mailman when/if resolved), this means we have to find a workaround.
And those non-members all have there moderation action set to Defer which means their posts will be accepted but the additional checks such as too big, etc. will still be applied.
not sure what you mean by "defer". The non-member options I see are called
List default -- follow the list's default member action. Hold -- This holds the message for approval by the list moderators. Reject -- this automatically rejects the message by sending a bounce notice to the post's author. The text of the bounce notice can be configured by you. Discard -- this simply discards the message, with no notice sent to the post's author. Accept -- accepts any postings without any further checks. Default Processing -- run additional checks and accept the message.
If they are nonmembers, you can accept the post and set moderation action in one operation in Postorius, but the regexps in hold_these_nonmembers will still take precedence.
OK, I've found where to do it, it requires to select the held message and scroll to the bottom then set Moderation from a menu.
But if hold_these_nonmembers takes priority this will be uselesws in the current setting.
I'm not sure what you are looking at here. Imported nonmembers should all have moderation action set according to which *_these_nonmembers they came from. Imported members should have their moderation action set to Defer if they were unmoderated and if they were moderated, it should be set based on the 2.1 list's member_moderation_action.
I go to the non-member list, select non-member options and at the bottom see an item Administration options Moderation. The possible values are those I pasted above.
The actual value for most of the imported non-members is "Default processing" while it is "List default" for thoase automatically added afresh, It is "Discard" for a number of imported non-members with spam-looking addresses (I guess they were in some other *_not_members part of the standard 2.1 antispam ... I can't recall me doing something on those)
Side question: is there a way to operate IN BULK on non-members ? Like it is for members (I exported them to CSV).
- if so, how can we do it automatically for all 189 entries ?
- or move back the 189 addresses to accept_these_nonmembers ?
Yes, move them back.
I am not so concerned of these 189 (or better of the 189 minus the discard ones which should stay) ... anyhow moving them back will be uncomfortable if there is not a bulk operation tool.
I am more concerned of the new cases automatically added.
Our member list includes 1043 addresses. Of these less than 20 use an external address (say gmail), so they post "from home" and will pass. 194 addresses are of the form name.surname@inaf.it (these are likely to be recently hired staff, who have and use onlyu the organization-wide address).
All the rest (so still more than 800, can't really ask all of them to re-register (*)) are of the form username@institute.inaf.it (and it won't be easy also to bulk-delete and bulk-resubscribe because of the inhomogeneous mapping of username to name.surname.
Of these about 800 some are lurkers and are no problem. Some are frequent posters and remember to post from username@institute.inaf.it and are no problem. Other may post from an alternate address (maybe even the old address exists as a receiving-only alias), and in this case with the current arrangement they will bo on hold every time.
I guess we should wait for the solution of issue 794
(*) by the way do you confirm that if one is subscribed to a list with an address (be it bulk subscription, import or new fast subscription), this person CANNOT change their settings (or address) unless one does a "sign in" to a (Postorius) account ?
It is because all the legacy *_these_nonmember actions are applied before nonmember moderation checks, so if an address matches a regex in hold_these_nonmembers, the post will be held regardless of the nonmember's moderation action.
Addresses still work, and accept_these_nonmembers takes precedence over hold_these_nonmembers just as in MM 2.1.
This was not my impression when I ran a thorough test of 12 cases. Except the obvious case of the subscriber posting from the subscription address, all messages went on hold.
Whatever the non-member moderation would be (even if set to reject ! ... but that makes sense if *_these_nonmembers prevail on non-member options), and even if the address was set explicitly in accept_these_nonmembers (should I delete it from the non-member list ?)
What is the actual order (or flow chart) of choices ?
*_these_nonmembers in the order listed in the page (within each in the order of occurrence of regexp's) then non-member options ?
If I have Name.Surname@inaf.it in accept_these_nonmembers, then hold_these_nonmembers set to
^.+@.+\.it ^.+@.+\.tng\.iac\.es
what do you foresee ?
And for different regexps, will processing terminate at the first non-matching one, will they be ANDed or ORed, or what ?
I am reluctant to accept inconditionally ^.+\..+@inaf\.it (they may be falsified, only the check on their presence in the other list (issue 794)
I guess I should remove the ^.+@.+\.it regexp AND AT THE SAME TIME change the Default action to take when a non-member posts to the list to Hold instead of Discard.
This way we'll have to check spam (instead of having it auto-discarded), but if people with alternate addresses post, once they are entered in the Non-member list they can be authorized to pass for the future ...
.. would it work ?
-- Lucio Chiappetti - INAF/IASF - via Corti 12 - I-20133 Milano (Italy) For more info : http://www.iasf-milano.inaf.it/~lucio/personal.html