From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cc-smtpout2.netcologne.de (cc-smtpout2.netcologne.de [89.1.8.212]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 464EF384A01B for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 09:54:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 464EF384A01B Received: from cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de (cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de [89.1.8.203]) by cc-smtpout2.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EA1012752; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 10:54:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07BB011EF1; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 10:54:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from [2001:4dd7:29b9:0:b89a:fee2:89cf:fb33] (helo=cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de) by localhost with ESMTP (eXpurgate 4.11.6) (envelope-from ) id 5e7735db-7104-7f0000012729-7f0000019a66-1 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 10:54:35 +0100 Received: from linux-p51k.fritz.box (2001-4dd7-29b9-0-b89a-fee2-89cf-fb33.ipv6dyn.netcologne.de [IPv6:2001:4dd7:29b9:0:b89a:fee2:89cf:fb33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 10:54:31 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Spam, bounces and gcc list removal To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" , Overseers mailing list Cc: overseers@gcc.gnu.org, gcc mailing list References: <82e9a365-63b1-93f6-9860-86f219e191be@netcologne.de> <20200321202941.GA15063@redhat.com> From: Thomas Koenig Message-ID: <97dcb3a4-a983-f3f8-d90f-a4932aeee3ab@netcologne.de> Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 10:54:30 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200321202941.GA15063@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: de-DE Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, KAM_SHORT, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: overseers@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Overseers mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 09:54:38 -0000 Am 21.03.20 um 21:29 schrieb Frank Ch. Eigler via Gcc: > Hi - > >>> since the change to the new list management, there has been >>> an uptick of spam getting through. Spam is bounced by my ISP, >>> and this just resulted in a warning that there were too many >>> bounces and that I would get removed from the list unless I >>> confirmed it (which I then did). >> This has now happened a second time, and this question > > For my reference, could you forward one of these spams & bounces to me? I never got to see them, because they never made it past my ISP. >>> So, a request: Could the overseers either install more effective >>> spam protection for the list as a whole (preferred) > > Heh, if only it were that easy! Spam filtering was and is distinct > from mailing list processing, and as you know it's a constant arms > race. We're working hard to make the new installation of spamassassin > as discriminating as possible. We're also working on the workflow to > clean the web archives of spam that got through. That makes it even less likely that I will be able to provide you with a sample, unfortunately. Maybe it would be better just to look at the logfiles? You will probably see a 550 5.7.1 Refused by local policy. No SPAM please! or similar there. >>> or relax the limit on bounces? > > OK, there are a couple of settings over at: > https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/admin/gcc/bounce > that law and we can think about, but I'd like > to see the messages in question to figure out what happened. Maybe it is possible to do it like the old mail system did: If there were too many bounces, it sent a probe, if that didn't bounce, nothing more happened. That worked OK, the current system does not. Regards Thomas