[Mailman-Users] Moderated list: admin vs moderator

[John W Baxter]

At 15:44 -0500 2/20/2002, Paul-Catalin Oros wrote:
>Well, that's the solution with the current Mailman. Something stronger
>(digital signatures) would, of course, be desirable but I don't think it's
>going to happen in the very near future.

The mailman-developer list is mostly not about Mailman 2.0.x.  It's about
the future.  It's about to switch more futureward than it is now, as
Mailman 2.1.x moves to this list (except for patch discussions, etc).  And
I explicitly spoke about the future.
>
>Thinking about it, maybe such a solution can be implemented with procmail and
>gpg. Mailman would accept everything that comes to it but procmail would
>intercept all emails before Mailman can even get them and test the signature
>using gpg. I don't know if anybody actually did it but it should be possible,
>if the requirements for security are high.

I don't WANT to put procmail in front of the lists.  In my hands, procmail
is the single thing which can most easily discard all mail without much
trace.  Mailman shouldn't--in the future--make me learn the darn thing.  If
I wanted to do the digital signature thing *today*, procmail and gpg or
some such combination would be the way (OK...over enough time to learn
procmail, not "today" unless I hire it out).

   --John (last touched a procmail recipe about 6 years ago)

-- 
John Baxter   jwblist at olympus.net      Port Ludlow, WA, USA