Search results for "Postorius" - Mailman-users

Re: A new issue with installation

by Andrew Hodgson

Abhilash Raj wrote: >On Sat, Feb 20, 2021, at 9:28 AM, Abhilash Raj wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021, at 8:51 AM, Brian Carpenter wrote: >> > As usual, a new issue has arisen with installing Mailman 3. It seems >> > Postorius and Hyperkitty want to install a module called cryptography. >> > Which I am unable to install because of this: >> > >> > error: Can not find Rust compiler >> >> You need to install a Rust compiler. Depending on which distro you are >> using, you can run `sudo apt install rustc` or same command with `yum`. [...] >FAQ: https://cryptography.io/en/latest/faq.html#installing-cryptography-fails-wi… > >You can skip the Rust components by setting `CRYPTOGRAPHY_DONT_BUILD_RUST` but that would work just for this release and you won't be able to skip from the next release of cryptography. Its also possible to install an older version of Cryptography before installing Mailman dependencies which doesn't require this. Version 3.3.2 is the version I have been using recently at work. On a side note I have been experimenting with using underlying Debian packages for some of the Python dependencies and using the --system-site-packages option when creating the venv to simplify installation and reduce the number of compilation tools required on the system. Thanks. Andrew.

4 years, 11 months

Re: Mailing list welcome message won't update

by Mark Sapiro

On 1/16/25 13:43, via Mailman-users wrote: > HI Mark, > > I simply tested by unsubsribing to the mailing list and then re-subscribing to receive the welcome message. > > How do you test using the mailman command with user list? sudo -u list mailman addmembers -h or in your case, you may not have that subcommand in which case see sudo -u list mailman members -h However, that is all irrelevant. I only thought you might be testing by using `mailman` commands to add a member and if so and if the command is not run as user `list`, it might not have access to read the template. If you are (un)subscribing via Postorius or via email these are handled by Mailman runner processes which should all be running as user `list` and should have access to the template. So, as I said, I don't know what the issue is unless it is something with your Debian package which is ancient. Even Debian buster has mailman core 3.2.1. Does your empty list:member:generic:footer.txt work to not add any footer to list messages? If so, I can't think of any reason why your list:user:notice:welcome.txt wouldn't be used. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

1 year

Re: [Mailman-Users] MM3 startup issues

by Mark Sapiro

Restoring original Subject:, and doesn't this thread belong on mailman-users(a)msailman3.org - CCing there. On 1/5/20 11:51 PM, Allan Hansen wrote: > > Thanks again, Mark! > My responses below. > >> On 1/4/20 5:47 PM, Allan Hansen wrote: >>> >>> a. The server was set up with the wrong domain name (our fault), so I had to add the ‘correct’ one. I had seen the command ‘Add Domain’ in >>> the UI and thought that would do it, but Brian kindly sent me a list of additional instructions, which we then implemented. That made it possible to create a list in the new domain, subscribe people and post messages. However, messages are not archived. What extra step is needed to enable archiving? >> >> >> What are the setytings in Postorius -> Settings -> Archiving? > > Archive policy: Private archives > Archive archivers: hyperkitty, prototype Are the messages in Mailman's var/archives/prototype/LIST@DOMAIN/new directory? Are there messages in Mailman's var/archives/hyperkitty/spool/ directory? What's the setting for base_url in mailman-hyperkitty.cfg? Are there any errors in var/logs/mailman.log? >>> b. When go to the server using the new domain (both before and after logging in), I see not just the lists I created in the new domain, but the lists created in the old domain. These lists of lists are domain specific and should not be listed together. That’s just IMHO, but not serious, as I will soon get rid of anything in the old domain. So feel free to ignore this one if this is intended, which I could see might be the case. >> >> >> Set >> >> FILTER_VHOST = True >> >> in settings_local.py >> > > Yes, Brian told me to do the same. This is the what I wrote back: > > hansen@rccrmail:/opt/mailman/mm$ sudo vi settings.py > > Edited the setting to: > # Only display mailing-lists from the same virtual host as the webserver > FILTER_VHOST = True You shouldn't edit settings.py. You should override the setting by putting it in settings_local.py. > Then Brian told me to restart qcluster: > hansen@rccrmail:/opt/mailman/mm$ sudo systemctl restart qcluster qcluster is not what you need to restart. You need to restart whatever is supporting the wsgi interface to Django. This may be uwsgi or gunicorn or ??. Whatever it is, that's what needs to be restarted. > I then logged in, but the same lists are showing. It either takes the system a long time to reset or it has ignored the > setting. > Just tried it again, and the lists are all showing. Do I need to manually recompile the file? > >> >>> c. I then moved on to the templates and added a template for the message text to send to new subscribers. That resulted in the following error message when I went in as moderator to approve of a new subscription: >>> >>> Something went wrong >>> Mailman REST API not available. Please start Mailman core. >> >> >> Postorius is unable to access core's REST API. Is Mailman running? > > Well, I was able to post to the lists, so I assume it is. Listing at processes, I see a bunch of postgres, python3, nginx, django-adminp but > nothing explicitly with a ‘mailman’ string. If you do `ps ax|grep runner=`, what do you see? If you don't see at least three processes with `--runner=rest:0:1`, stop Mailman and start Mailman. >> If so, what's in /opt/mailman/mm/var/logs/mailmansuite.log or whatever it's >> called - defined as `filename` in the `file` handler in the LOGGING >> definition in settings(_local).py. > > hansen@rccrmail:/opt/mailman/mm/logs$ tail -f mailmansuite.log > return Site.objects.get_current(request) > File "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/django/contrib/sites/models.py", line 60, in get_current > return self._get_site_by_request(request) > File "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/django/contrib/sites/models.py", line 45, in _get_site_by_request > SITE_CACHE[domain] = self.get(domain__iexact=domain) > File "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/django/db/models/manager.py", line 82, in manager_method > return getattr(self.get_queryset(), name)(*args, **kwargs) > File "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/django/db/models/query.py", line 408, in get > self.model._meta.object_name > django.contrib.sites.models.Site.DoesNotExist: Site matching query does not exist. This is because of the domain change. In settings(_local).py you have a setting for SITE_ID. Possibly, setting that in settings_local.py to a value one greater that the current setting will do. To be certain of the correct value, you need to look at the django_site table in mailman's database. That table has 3 columns, id, domain and name. The id for the row of your domain is what needs to be set as SITE_ID. > [ABH] At this point I click to accept a subsription request: > > ERROR 2020-01-06 07:32:41,439 699 postorius.middleware Mailman REST API not available > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/urllib3/connectionpool.py", line 672, in urlopen > chunked=chunked, > File "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/urllib3/connectionpool.py", line 421, in _make_request > six.raise_from(e, None) > File "<string>", line 3, in raise_from > File "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.7/site-packages/urllib3/connectionpool.py", line 416, in _make_request > httplib_response = conn.getresponse() > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/http/client.py", line 1321, in getresponse > response.begin() > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/http/client.py", line 296, in begin > version, status, reason = self._read_status() > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/http/client.py", line 265, in _read_status > raise RemoteDisconnected("Remote end closed connection without" > http.client.RemoteDisconnected: Remote end closed connection without response > > So yes, the REST API is not there. How can I get it going? Stop Mailman and then start it. > Before we added the new domain, I was able to accept subscription requests to the previous domain’s lists. No more. > > Yours, > > Allan -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

6 years

Enforcing SSO and subscription options

by Stephen J. Turnbull

dlb-ml--- via Mailman-users writes: > I'm looking to see if there's any way to isolate the third-party > login section and prevent local account sign in and sign up. This > way, we can ensure that the people within our organization are > using a stronger auth method that prioritizes MFA, rather than just > username/password. This is really a Django/allauth question. I strongly recommend you ask there. Maybe Mark knows more, but my own experience with it is limited, and the client specified the setup, I just implemented it. > I did see that there is the SOCALACCOUNT_ONLY option, as provided > by allauth > (https://docs.allauth.org/en/latest/socialaccount/configuration.html) > but that broke any attempt to display the sign in page, My experience was using Shibboleth to authenticate to Apache, require authenticated user for all Mailman and Django locations, and Apache would communicate the authenticated user ID directly to Postorius. You could visit the page, but because you were already authenticated, you had to log out to log in. But -- Catch-22 -- that access would go through Apache and log you in. > assuming [SOCIALACCOUNT_ONLY] is not supported with the current > version of MM3. AFAIK, there's no code in Postorius that's specific to processing authentication -- that's all done by Django or Django plugins, and controlled by the standard Django and allauth parameters. So it's not something Mailman is related to supporting. This is a question of what allauth, and possibly Django core, supports. It's possible that Mailman defaults to a configuration that messes up Django's support, but if so I would bet that somebody with deep knowledge of how allauth works could tell you how to get the effect you want. > Is my plan to modify the templates viable? It's not clear what your goal is. If it's just to keep typical users on the straight and narrow, yes, that should work. But as far as I know, a competent user who is mischievous or malicious can probably craft requests to successfully access any locations that are not disabled in code or protected by the frontend webserver. Disabling the signup adapter will definitely make mischief much harder, but I can't promise it's impossible. But if you have a SSO system with an organization-specific IDP or a database of 3rd-party accounts with Google or whatever, I would think you'd want to use that as the source of ground truth directly, as I described my experience above, rather than creating a separate credientials database in Django. > Given the discussions on disabling the anonymous subscription form, > are the email commands a less spam-susceptible solution or are they > just as vulnerable as the form? The whole point of email commands was to allow anonymous signups (more precisely, pseudonymous signups tied to a mailbox). If you don't want "anonymous" signups, you don't want to enable the email commands.

11 months, 3 weeks

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Mailman 3.1 beta coming soon

by Mark Sapiro

On 12/02/2016 08:07 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > Hello Mailman 3 users and developers! > > It's been a long slog but I think we are finally ready to begin the release > process for Mailman 3.1. I am pretty happy about the state of the Core, and > Florian is going to do some more integration testing with HyperKitty and > Postorius. We still have a few issues and a merge proposal or two to address, > but I am planning to spin a beta of Core this weekend to facilitate testing. Barry, I understand you need to feel comfortable about everything going into the core and this takes time and energy to review all the MRs, but I think it is pretty important to get the DMARC mitigations into the core. If there's anything I can do to help with this, let me know. I will rebase my branch again and possibly make one minor tweak, but I think it should be OK. I can also work on Postorius. Also in this vein I have a question. Should the DMARC settings be added to the Alter Messages tab in the List Settings view or would it be better to have a separate DMARC Mitigations tab. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

9 years, 1 month

Re: Sending a message to a subscription applicant when a subscription request is made

by Mark Sapiro

On 3/28/23 09:19, Allan Hansen wrote: > Mark, > > I tried doing this. > I unsubscribed myself from a list, set the policy as you suggest and re-applied. > I got no confirmation messages but as moderator I got the moderate message. How did you reapply? with the subscribe policy confirm then moderate a new subscriber should get the list:user:action:subscribe message and have to confirm before the request waits moderation? However, see below. > I then tried a bogus email and saw that a message was sent to that and no moderator message to me. > Would the server skip the verification message because I'm a moderator/admin? It's not because you are an admin. It's because you were logged in when you subscribed from the list's info page. You will need to confirm if you subscribe anonymously without logging in or subscribe via email, but if you are logged in to Postorius when you request subscription, that is sufficient confirmation that the request really comes from you, so you don't get an email confirmation. So, depending on your circumstances, this may or may not work for you. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

2 years, 10 months

Re: "autorespond to list owner" setting when importing from mailman2 to mailman3

by Mark Sapiro

On 2/25/22 08:32, bob B via Mailman-users wrote: > In mailman2 a list was moderated, the admin would also get an email to approve the message, our lists mainly have admins and no moderators. The admins did the moderation. > > In mailman3 it looks this is now a setting "autorespond to list owner" was this a setting in mailman 2? Yes, in MM 2.1 this was in the Auto-responder section of the admin UI, but this isn't what you wan. > Anyway, in importing email list from mailman 2 to 3, it appears that this setting is set to "No automatic response", is that right? Probably. It is =correct if that was the MM 2.1 setting. > So does this means if I import all my lists from mailman 2, then the admins will not get moderation notifications until I make that setting change on each list? No. The setting you want was Mailman 2.1's General Options -> admin_immed_notify which should be correctly imported to what Postorius shows as Settings -> Automatic Responses -> Admin immed notify and whether that is Yes or No, they should get periodic notices as long as cron is running `mailman notify`. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

3 years, 11 months

Re: One-click unsubscribe?

by Jered Floyd

> As I discovered (to my chagrin) Mailman's current simple RFC > 2369 List-Unsubscribe field doesn't, even for personalized lists where > there might be a personalized link in the footer. My understanding from up-thread is that the RFC 2369 headers are added pre-personalization. > The token would be the > encrypted (list, address) pair, possibly dated in clear (to allow > expiration of tokens and rotation of encryption keys). Unfortunately > RFC 8058 doesn't discuss that, I guess John assumed that people would > usually be unsubscribing from the most recent post. I don't think we can assume that it will be the most recent post, but it would likely be _a_ recent post. If we add a timestamp to the encrypted token I suggest there should be a pretty broad window allowed (i.e. several months). > On the assumption > that unsubscribes would be "rare", you wouldn't have to store the > token in the database. (Have to think about that, you might be able > to DOS attack by sending lots of fake unsubscribes and attack the > encryption with known plaintext attacks. Safety would suggest adding > a random nonce and that would need to be saved in the database.) Do you just mean a salt? Or are you suggesting adding a per-subscription nonce stored in the DB? (In which case, that could simply be the URI token...) I agree with your analysis, but this would be a very specialized attack, especially if we don't provide direct feedback on if the request was successful (which we are not required to do). I have trouble constructing a practical threat here and I think the encrypted tuple, or a plaintext tuple and truncated HMAC (like how SRS works) would be sufficient. The real risk without a per-subscription random unique identifier would be a replay attack -- the user is unsubscribed multiple times? That feels outside of the threat model. > Alternatively, you could reverse proxy this directly through the > front-end webserver to Mailman core with a new REST endpoint. That > gives me bad vibes because I can just see naive admins messing up the > configuration of the single endpoint, and "fixing" the problem by > reverse proxying port 8001 to the Internet. We'd have to be careful > that the urlconf not slop over to anything else, maybe something like > "listen" on the Internet at (nginx notation): > > location /mailman3/rfc8058/ { > proxy_pass http://localhost:8001/3.2/PROXIED/rfc8058; > } > > The "PROXIED" part is just to provide a REST namespace that is > obviously separate from the domains, addresses, users, lists, etc. > Maybe "SELF_AUTHORIZING" would be more accurate. I think that reverse > proxy sepcification would be safe enough. > > And you could combine the two strategies which would allow sites that > don't use Postorius to configure the reverse proxy, while sites that > do would get it for "free" since we'd configure Postorius to do it. I hadn't considered this -- I definitely like this approach because it means the same function need not be implemented twice, differently. I guess the big question is now just what the simplest content of the URI should be. > Aside: RFC 8058 says > > But anti-spam software often fetches all resources in mail header > fields automatically, without any action by the user, and there is > no mechanical way for a sender to tell whether a request was made > automatically by anti-spam software or manually requested by a > user. > > Weirdly, the RFC doesn't address this problem at all. :-( This has always been the risk with single-click anything. Given how common this is as a use case, I believe that the anti-spam/anti-phishing systems have stopped clicking links willy-nilly, or at least special case List-Unsubscribe URIs. I also see that inbound mail filters these days are more likely to rewrite clickable links to bounce through a redirector so the scan happens at access (rather than receipt) time -- so the link is only proxy-clicked when the user does intend to do so. A bigger threat might be web archives that include the list headers and clickable links. The GenAI companies are absolutely _hammering_ anything they can get a hold of with spiders that ignore all robots.txt or rate limit indicators. I have to keep blocking user agents and IP ranges because I'm spending $100s/month in excess egress fees on badly-written LLM spiders. The Internet is an increasingly hostile place. Regardless, not something we can do much about. --Jered

2 months

attempted upgrade failed. restored backup. now inoperable. why?

by Christian

Attempted upgrade on Debian 10 to Mailman3.3 went badly. Prior to attempted upgrade system was working but with incremental unsubscribes due to erroneous bounces upping subscribers scores. Restored from backup. System now not working. Postorius webpage says "Mailman REST API not available. Please start Mailman core." Mailman will not start. Command line thread is as follows: root@lists:~# systemctl start mailman Job for mailman.service failed because the control process exited with error code. See "systemctl status mailman.service" and "journalctl -xe" for details. root@lists:~# systemctl status mailman.service ● mailman.service - GNU Mailing List Manager Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/mailman.service; enabled; vendor preset: enabled) Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Sat 2023-12-23 09:01:41 PST; 5min ago Process: 3773 ExecStart=/opt/mailman/mm/bin/mailman start (code=exited, status=2) Dec 23 09:01:41 lists.ccalternatives.org systemd[1]: Starting GNU Mailing List Manager... Dec 23 09:01:41 lists.ccalternatives.org mailman[3773]: Usage: mailman start [OPTIONS] Dec 23 09:01:41 lists.ccalternatives.org mailman[3773]: Try 'mailman start -h' for help. Dec 23 09:01:41 lists.ccalternatives.org mailman[3773]: Error: A previous run of GNU Mailman did not exit cleanly (host_mismatch). Try using --force Dec 23 09:01:41 lists.ccalternatives.org systemd[1]: mailman.service: Control process exited, code=exited, status=2/INVALIDARGUMENT Dec 23 09:01:41 lists.ccalternatives.org systemd[1]: mailman.service: Failed with result 'exit-code'. Dec 23 09:01:41 lists.ccalternatives.org systemd[1]: Failed to start GNU Mailing List Manager. root@lists:~# Please help. Thank you!

2 years, 1 month

Re: Confirmation emails to Users has wrong domain name (example.com!)

by Odhiambo Washington

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 1:59 AM Abhilash Raj <maxking(a)asynchronous.in> wrote: > > > > On Sep 29, 2021, at 2:34 PM, Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:31 PM Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> wrote: > > > >> On 9/29/21 9:50 AM, Odhiambo Washington wrote: > >>> 1. Confirmation emails to Users has wrong domain name (example.com!) > >>> <https://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/faq.html#id1> > >>> < > >> > https://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/faq.html#confirmation-emails-to-users-h… > >>> > >>> > >>> This happens when your reverse (SSL) proxy isn’t setting up the correct > >>> headers when proxying requests. Fix this by setting the right > >>> proxy_set_header directives: > >> ... > >>> How is this supposed to be mitigated in Apache when using WSGI? > >>> > >>> My config: > >>> > >>> WSGIDaemonProcess hyperkitty threads=25 python-path=/usr/local/mailman > >>> user=mailman group=mailman > >>> WSGIPythonHome "/usr/local" > >>> WSGIProcessGroup hyperkitty > >> > >> > >> You are using mod_wsgi and not proxying at all, so this is not relevant > >> in your case. > >> > >> Are you actually seeing this issue? If so, it might be related to > >> > >> > https://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/faq.html#the-domain-name-displayed-in-h… > >> > > > > My issue is related to this, but the documentation referred to is not for > > the faint-hearted! > > I can't make head or tails of it. > > Click on “Domain” in Postorius from the top bar, which should take you to > the Domains page. > > For your domain (in the “Mail Host” column), see the corresponding “Web > Host” column, it should look something like: > > lists.mailman3.org (lists.mailman3.org) > (Edit) > SITE_ID = 1 > Mine looks different, slightly. But there is no example.com at all. [image: Abhilash.png] > > on a new-ish version of Postorius. > I have the newest versions of everything, having installed only yesterday. > > If it doesn’t show the right values and instead shows “example.com” for > you, click on the “Edit” link, which will take > you to a page that will allow you to edit both the values. > It shows the right values, but with "SITE_ID = 2". In my settings_local.py I have SITE_ID = 1. I suppose the example.com is the one tied to SITE_ID = 1 and that is what I have in my settings_local.py. Should I edit my settings_local.py? I am still confused. -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254 7 3200 0004/+254 7 2274 3223 "Oh, the cruft.", egrep -v '^$|^.*#' :-)

4 years, 4 months

Mailman-users search results for query "Postorius"