Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

en - Re: [sympa-users] sympa vs smartlist...

Subject: The mailing list for listmasters using Sympa

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Olivier Salaun - CRU <address@concealed>
  • To: Marco Gaiarin <address@concealed>
  • Cc: address@concealed
  • Subject: Re: [sympa-users] sympa vs smartlist...
  • Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:39:12 +0100

Hi Marco,

I don't fully understand your description of how Smartlist authenticates users, but here is how Sympa deals with this :

Default 'subscribe' authorization scenario is 'subscribe.open' that does no authentication of user, trusting the From: SMTP header field. But Sympa can be cautious... First of all when subscribing from the web interface, the user needs to authenticate with the password (s)he received by mail. When subscribing by email, the 'subscribe.auth' requires to confirm his/her request via email.

If you have a look at some authorization scenarios, you'll note the 'smime' authentication methods that make it possible to authenticate via S/Mime signed commands/messages. Sympa can also distribute S/Mime encrypted messages, but this is no more authentication...

You should read the "authorization scenarios" chapter of Sympa reference manual :
http://www.sympa.org/doc/html/

Marco Gaiarin wrote:

[...]
I've still a problem with it, and is a real low-level, where smartlist
seems unbeatable...

In smartlist there's an algorithm that ``calculate'' the real sender,
and is very effective, thanks to a very complicated procmail recipe.
In smartlist is common to have, in closed list, the from set to a
``foreign'' (not subscribed) addess, the sender a ``known'' (subscribed)
addess, and the message pass.
Really, this is the smartlist method to ``approve'' a message: the list
owner simply bounces the message back to the list.

I've setup also 2 closed list in sympa, but it sufficies to alter the
from to let the message pass. I send all the (home) mail from the
domain bbs.lilliput.linux.it , i've simply put in the from: the address
subscribed (marcogaio (at) libero.it) and the message pass.
I've done the same test from this (work) domain, sv.lnf.it.


This is known?! Is a bug or a feature?! There's some obscure feature of
sympa to enable strict sender check?!
If not, could be implemented the ``real sender identification''
algorithm in sympa?! I think is not so hard to convert a procmail
recipe in an equivalent perl regexp...

--
Olivier Salaun
Comite Reseau des Universites





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.

Top of Page