[Mailman-Developers] Dealing with idiots using CRAP

[Nigel Metheringham]

Barry,

This guy (see forwarded message) is using a Challenge Response
Authentication Program (CRAP - appropriate acronym) on stuff he is
receiving using a mailing list.  Unfortunately its broken enough that
the replies are going back to the original poster.  Can you terminate
him (or just remove his list membership).

If possible I'd mod Mailman to make it extremely unfriendly to such
programs, unfortunately this one is so completely broken that just
kicking the idiot off the list is the only appropriate response.

[BTW I haven't replied with the magic token since there is nothing civil
I could say to him - shame the system won't automatically block any mail
he tries to send me]

	Nigel.

-----Forwarded Message-----
> From: CARTER Anthony <a.carter at intrasoft.lu>
> To: Nigel.Metheringham at dev.InTechnology.co.uk
> Subject: Re: Re: [Mailman-Developers] sleep() after sending a chunk? (Spam Ender:  BLOCKED 1R92-SE45602-Nigel.Metheringham at dev.InTechnology.co.uk)
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:58:20 +0200
> 
> In an effort to eliminate unsolicited e-mail, I have installed SpamEnder.
> Please REPLY to this e-mail, without modifying the subject line, so that I
> can receive your original message. Upon my approval, future e-mails you send
> to me will be released automatically. If you do not REPLY to this e-mail,
> SpamEnder will block all future e-mails from this address and will not give
> you another opportunity to reply.
> 
> Sorry for any inconvenience.
> Anthony Carter
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Excerpt from original message:
> On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 17:39, Fil wrote:
> > I'd really love to add somme sleep() function just after the
> deliveryfunc()
> > call, something that would set Mailman to sleep about 1/10th of a second
> per
> > recipient. 
> 
> I just don't see the point of this.  You may have stopped a large list
> inject being so aggressive on CPU usage, but you have increased the
> lifetime of processes by a factor of 30 or so (on your figures), and so
> increased the memory pressure and likelihood of swapping etc due to
> processes being just as fat but lasting longer.
> 
> Your users may notice the big lists getting much slower - and having
> deliveries smeared over a much longer period.
> 
> You may find you have made things less efficient by having 2 deliveries
> to a single list slowed down so that different messages to the same
> recipient can no longer be put in the same SMTP session (if your MTA
> does that).  For that matter can multiple deliveries be made against the
> same list at the same time?
> 
> Why not just run the cron jobs under nice instead?
> 
> 	Nigel.
-- 
[ Nigel Metheringham           Nigel.Metheringham at InTechnology.co.uk ]
[ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]