tl;dr: Is there a way to have VERP probe messages not include copies
of the bounce message that triggered them?

Longer form...

Some months ago I turned on bounce processing for a fairly large
list with a long history, because I could see from the MTA logs that
there were easily hundreds of old subscribers whose addresses had
become defunct and this seemed like a great way to clean that up and
make the server more conscientious at not repeatedly trying to
deliver messages to sites that were just going to reject them. This
worked really well.

Until legitimate subscribers also started to get removed, that is,
due primarily to false positives from overzealous spam filters. I
had previously read about MM3's VERP probe message feature, which
seemed to solve the main reason I had kept bounce processing
disabled in the MM2 days, and thought it was on by default but
clearly it wasn't. So I found the necessary config option and
switched that on. This worked really well.

Until legitimate subscribers started to get removed again, that is,
due primarily to false positives from overzealous spam filters. See,
I realized that the VERP probes were helpfully including copies of
the most recent bounce for that user, and those NDRs quite often
helpfully included their own copies of the messages which had been
bounced. So if a subscriber's MTA was rejecting a message because
the content looked like spam, then there was a good chance it would
also reject the VERP probe message because it included the same
content which had caused the earlier rejection. The VERP probe
feature was essentially defeating its own purpose as a neutral
confirmation that the subscriber hadn't been rejecting messages due
to their content.

This behavior raises a more significant concern as well. The MTA on
the Mailman server in this case (Exim if it matters) wants to
perform batch deliveries when there are multiple subscribers who all
share the same remote MTAs. If multiples of those reject a list
post, then the NDR back to Mailman aggregates those multiple
rejections into a single message. If that incident triggers a VERP
probe, the bulk NDR enumerating the addresses of all the subscribers
who were rejected gets forwarded along as part of the VERP probe,
disclosing a potentially sensitive litany of random subscriber
addresses to other subscribers within that batch. I don't know
whether this is a misconfiguration, or an unintended consequence of
the intersection of Mailman and MTA features.

While I understand that the inclusion of a bounce sample within a
VERP probe may be a way to take some workload off list admins in
that users can possibly see a message/rejection to explain the
reason for the probe, the downsides of that choice make the feature
unfortunately unusable for some lists that could otherwise have
benefited from it. Am I possibly missing an existing switch that
could make VERP probe messages *not* include copies of the bounces
that triggered them?

This is in some ways similar to the problems I've noticed with
message hold notifications to moderators including copies of the
held messages, since these are (at least in the case of the lists I
manage) often spam, so has a tendency to cause the mail providers
for the list moderators to start considering the mailing list server
a spam source. If there were a switch to make message hold
notifications to moderators *not* include copies of the messages
themselves, I'd start allowing moderator notifications again.

Suggestions welcome! Also willing to try to submit patches to enable
some of these solutions if they don't already exist. And thanks to
anyone who read this far!
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Mailman-users mailing list -- mailman-users@mailman3.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mailman-users-le...@mailman3.org
https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users.mailman3.org/
Archived at: 
https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-users@mailman3.org/message/OFTHDKATNSDCXO6VDNDFFVR6BI37R64J/

This message sent to arch...@mail-archive.com

Reply via email to