On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:33:24PM +0300, Dov Zamir wrote:
> Steve wrote:
>> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
>>> Datum: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:48:47 -0500
>>> Von: Troy Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> An: [email protected]
>>> Betreff: Re: [dspam-users] How to force whitelisting ?
>>  
>>> - Full email address matching ( IE "Joe Schmoe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
>>> )
>>>
>> You really want RFC822 style address format syntax checks? Would RFC821 
>> style address format syntax not be enough (aka: [EMAIL PROTECTED])? I 
>> ask because most users will probably know "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to be 
>> the address to whitelist and not the full RFC822 address "Joe Schmoe" 
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. However.... the RFC821 style address format 
>> syntax would match a full blown RFC822 address but not the other way 
>> around.
>>> - Option to match on from address and/or "Reply-to:" address.
>>>
>> Per entered whitelist address?
>>> - Administratively managed per user whitelist
>>>
>> So one admin is managing a users whitelist? This is different then the 
>> other request from a ML member where each user is managing only his own 
>> list.
>
> I do not see the merit of adding this (admin managed whitelist) 
> functionality to dspam. There are plenty of tools out there already do this 
> so that one could whitelist globally and avoid running the said mail 
> through dspam altogether. IMHO the single most advantageous function in 
> dspam that would justify adding a manual whitelist function would only be 
> if it were per user and managed by the user, something that dspam does 
> exceptionally well already with the present auto whitelist function.
>

I have to agree. There are many easier ways to administratively manage
system whitelists that do not incur DSPAM processing and overhead. The
benefit for this would be to have a user manage extra entries to their
personal whitelists. One of the things missing from the auto-whitelist
function is a way to easily remove or add additional addresses manually.
In my mind, having a threshold for them to drop out of the whitelist
similar to the auto-whitelist would also be useful. A global whitelist
would not be useful because of the possibility for abuse.

Cheers,
Ken

>>> - No user managed whitelist.
>>>
>> See above.
>>> - No global whitelist.
>>>
>> See above.
>>> - dspam gui displays whitelisted emails.
>>>
>> In a different way then the automatic whitelisted addresses? Currently 
>> whitelisted entries are shown in violet color in the DSPAM Web UI. Do you 
>> want the mails matching the manual entered email whitelist addresses to be 
>> colored/tagged differently in the Web UI?
>>> -Troy
>>>
>> // Steve
>
>
> 
>
>
>

!DSPAM:1011,487666c5150921663935309!


Reply via email to