RE: [SAtalk] Re: URI database lookup feature (was Sanity checking new uri rules?)

2003-11-19 Thread Carl R. Friend
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Larry Gilson wrote: > Most of you guys can get over my head quickly. Read, learn, and exceed us. :-) > This sounds a lot like the squidGuard blacklist implementation. You start > with a base text file - one each for domains, urls, and regex. It is up to > each the a

RE: [SAtalk] Re: URI database lookup feature (was Sanity checking new uri rules?)

2003-11-18 Thread Larry Gilson
> -Original Message- > From: Chris Santerre --snip-- > > > > One of the big advantages of using a DB type system is that it > > can be updated 'hot' on a running system. A system based upon > > parsing a config file and creating an in-memory hash table would > > requirerestarting sp

RE: [SAtalk] Re: URI database lookup feature (was Sanity checking new uri rules?)

2003-11-18 Thread Chris Santerre
> > would be looked up as "www.stearns.org" or "stearns.org".) > > The parser in the Bayes routine (tokenize_line in Bayes.pm) > creates 'UD:' > lookup tokens for each component of the domain name. So for the above > example, it would create: > UD:www.stearns.org > UD:stearns.org >

[SAtalk] Re: URI database lookup feature (was Sanity checking new uri rules?)

2003-11-17 Thread David B Funk
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Justin Mason wrote: > BTW, given that a URI DB cannot use regular expressions, or patterns, > would this really be useful? > > Basically with a DB you only gain efficiency when looking up exact > strings. So for this to be useful against URIs, you'd have to pick out > *just*