soyuz status messages should not use the submitters email address

Hi Robert,

Are you talking about upload notification ? What do you mean by "status notifications in soyuz" ?

We use the upload submitter preferredemail to notify upload processing result and also notify the other developers via the distrorelease changes mailisting.

What precisely do you suggest us to not use ?

On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 12:15 +0000, Celso Providelo wrote:
>
> Are you talking about upload notification ? What do you mean by
> "status
> notifications in soyuz" ?

Yes

> We use the upload submitter preferredemail to notify upload processing
> result and also notify the other developers via the distrorelease
> changes mailisting.
>
> What precisely do you suggest us to not use ?

Any email address that is not owned by the canonical server sending the
email.

Using the submitters email will blow up spectacularly in a growing
number of cases. Its essentially forging mail, which spammers do - so as
more people put in facilities to prevent that, it will become harder and
harder to do so successfully.

-Rob
--
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.

I'm no expert, but I believe we're ok on SPF and friends, as we use an appropriate address for the Sender header and the envelope sender.

It's just the From field which we populate with the user's address.

Any reason for not using the originator's e-mail address here probably also applies to changes made to bugs with the Web interface, so please don't change one without at least discussing it with the other.

It sounds like you have thought it through, so let me leave this in your
hands with one final thought: it was -extremely- concerning for me to
see an email from me come into my mailbox.

I may be unique here though :(

GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.

As far as mails to the -changes lists go, we've always used the uploader's email address as the sending address, as we view it more as a forwarding list, rather than a generated mail. You're uploading the .changes, then it's forwarded to -changes, essentially unaltered, as if you'd written the mail in the first place and sent it to the list.

This is pretty useful when reading the -changes list archives, so we can see at a glance who uploaded what, without seeing a bunch of useless mails from "Ubuntu Installer", and it's also quite handy to be able to just smack Reply and tell off an uploader for a particularly silly upload they've just made, or what-have-you.

Now, one could argue that these mails need to be sent twice, with two different submitters, so you, the uploader, get a mail in your inbox from "Ubuntu Installer" telling you that your upload was accepted, while the -changes mailing list gets a mail from you with the contents of the .changes. Of course, I think this is more or less how it's done now, modulo a few buggy behaviours.

On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 10:17 +0000, Adam Conrad wrote:
> As far as mails to the -changes lists go, we've always used the
> uploader's email address as the sending address, as we view it more as a
> forwarding list, rather than a generated mail. You're uploading the
> .changes, then it's forwarded to -changes, essentially unaltered, as if
> you'd written the mail in the first place and sent it to the list.
>
> This is pretty useful when reading the -changes list archives, so we can
> see at a glance who uploaded what, without seeing a bunch of useless
> mails from "Ubuntu Installer", and it's also quite handy to be able to
> just smack Reply and tell off an uploader for a particularly silly
> upload they've just made, or what-have-you.
>
> Now, one could argue that these mails need to be sent twice, with two
> different submitters, so you, the uploader, get a mail in your inbox
> from "Ubuntu Installer" telling you that your upload was accepted, while
> the -changes mailing list gets a mail from you with the contents of the
> .changes. Of course, I think this is more or less how it's done now,
> modulo a few buggy behaviours.

Its a good usecase - making the uploaders easy to see.

Just speculating here - did you consider
From: Ubuntu Installer <email address hidden>
Subject: Robert Collins <robert...> - package-version-arch

?

The reason I'm arguing against having any mail sent that proports to be
from me but isn't is that all my mail is gpg signed - mail with my name
on it but not signed by me should set of warning bells for anyone
reading it.

-Rob
--
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.

Robert Collins wrote:
>
> The reason I'm arguing against having any mail sent that proports to be
> from me but isn't is that all my mail is gpg signed - mail with my name
> on it but not signed by me should set of warning bells for anyone
> reading it.

All your .changes files should be GPG signed too, so this seems somewhat
moot. See, for instance:

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/edgy-changes/2006-August/003898.html

... Adam

[Expired for Soyuz because there has been no activity for 60 days.]