Looks like "Moderator" password is a non-issue[1].
"Admin" passwords were changed earlier, ... so we should be in pretty good shape at this point.
footnotes/references/excerpts: 1. once upon a time the "Moderator" password was set. The one I had in my notes was, I believe, passed to me the same time the "Admin" password had been much earlier passed to me. I'm also fairly certain "way back then" I verified that each password worked on each of the lists. Seems "Moderator" password/functionality is disabled (as we desire it), as A) I checked, and the old "Moderator" password no longer works, and B) the GUI admin stuff quite effectively states that the "Moderator" role only works if both a password is set for it, and an email is set for "Moderator" - and I checked and all three lists have no email set for "Moderator" - so I believe that effectively disables any "Moderator" capability or login - so I think we're well covered there.
Quoting "Rick Moen" rick@linuxmafia.com:
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
Thanks - got it (from earlier encrypted contents you sent me) and verified it authenticates.
Also, as you mentioned, "Moderator" password....
I recommend against ever using this function, by the way. So, there's no point in setting its password. (I can detail the reason for that recommendation if anyone's interested. Long story. Short version is that it leads directly to mishaps that the person wielding that password cannot fix.)
It's quite possible many of the "misconfiguration" changes may have been done - perhaps by someone who has "Moderator" password, and may not even have "Admin" password.
I don't think so, because I'm pretty sure nobody has set that password. However, the mishaps I allude to above involve someone accidentally checking a "autodiscard" or "ban" control on the admin queue page and submitting changes, then being unable to remove that address from the autodiscard or ban rosters upon realising his/her mistake, because those rosters are on an admin page to which moderators lack access.
So, in theory, someone wielding a moderator password could have accidentally put Christian Einfeldt's address on the autodiscard list. All the other changes I discussed are possible only with a listadmin password.
If you don't want to be bothered with changing the "Moderator" password (you already covered "Admin" - Thanks!) ... just say the word and I'll take care of "Moderator" password.
You're welcome to set it to something obscure and then forget what it is. That's probably the smartest thing to do with it. ;->
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
- once upon a time the "Moderator" password was set. The one I had in
my notes was, I believe, passed to me the same time the "Admin" password had been much earlier passed to me. I'm also fairly certain "way back then" I verified that each password worked on each of the lists. Seems "Moderator" password/functionality is disabled (as we desire it), as A) I checked, and the old "Moderator" password no longer works, and B) the GUI admin stuff quite effectively states that the "Moderator" role only works if both a password is set for it, and an email is set for "Moderator" - and I checked and all three lists have no email set for "Moderator" - so I believe that effectively disables any "Moderator" capability or login
If you'll please indulge me for a minute, there's a fine point on which I'll want to correct the above explanation. This matter actually applies equally to Mailman's "moderator" and "listadmin" concepts. Please pardon a brief departure into Mailman neepery, which I'll indulge because it's the one key area in Mailman administration that most confuses people.
A lot of the documentation claims (as above) that the roles work only if someone has the related password and his/her e-mail address is set for that role. That's actually not true.
In fact, the matters of whose e-mail addresses are listed for those roles, and who has those passwords, are completely orthogonal. They concern different, if related, things:
1. Your e-mail address being listed for a role just means you receive e-mailed notices that something new has landed in the admin queue (and summary reminders about the queue).
2. Your possessing the related password means you can get access to the admin screens.
Anyone citing the "moderator" password at a mailing list's admin prompt (on the Web) can see and act on the administrative queue.
Anyone citing the "listadmin" password at a mailing list's admin prompt (on the Web) can _both_ see and act on the administrative queue _and_ can modify the way the mailing list as a whole operates (and carry out other actions on the list, up to and including its deletion).
Getting the "something's just landed in the queue" notices but lacking the password (and thus not being able to do anything about them) would be maddening and pointless. That seldom happens.
The other scenario, of possessing the moderator and/or listadmin password but not receiving the notices, _that_ happens frequently, generally because people pass the passwords around, or people used to receive the notices but removed themselves but still possess the still-unchanged password, or something like that.
Once upon a time, it was said:
Quoting "Michael Paoli" Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu:
Quoting "Rick Moen" rick@linuxmafia.com:
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
If you don't want to be bothered with changing the "Moderator" password (you already covered "Admin" - Thanks!) ... just say the word and I'll take care of "Moderator" password.
You're welcome to set it to something obscure and then forget what it is. That's probably the smartest thing to do with it. ;->
Quoting "Rick Moen" rick@linuxmafia.com:
A lot of the documentation claims (as above) that the roles work only if someone has the related password and his/her e-mail address is set for that role. That's actually not true.
Anyway, not sure if we actually covered changing that "moderator" password earlier this year, or not ... so, ... to cover our bases (defense in depth :-)), it's been changed now - to something quite obscure, and then promptly irretrievably forgotten (having highly efficiently non-reversiblely encrypted and compressed it, by writing it to /dev/null).
references: http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-admin-balug.org/2009-April/000662.htm... http://lists.balug.org/pipermail/balug-admin-balug.org/2009-April/000665.htm...
Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli@cal.berkeley.edu):
Anyway, not sure if we actually covered changing that "moderator" password earlier this year, or not ... so, ... to cover our bases (defense in depth :-)), it's been changed now - to something quite obscure, and then promptly irretrievably forgotten (having highly efficiently non-reversiblely encrypted and compressed it, by writing it to /dev/null).
Thanks!