InfoSecurity show

[Chris Trudeau]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:52:47 +0100, Julian Field
<mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK> wrote:

>At 21:42 29/04/2003, you wrote:
>>FWIW The main argument I hear for moving to a commercial product is the
>>'content filtering' that some of the commercial products claim to do.
>>The main reasons for this being HR & legal related (not just porn but
>>also profanity, and prevention of information leakage - quite how that
>>could be achieved with any degree or certainty). I know all about the
>>striphtml action, but that alone isn't seen as being enough.  The other
>>'essential requirement' of a content filtering is detailed reporting.
>
>General content filtering (be it for reporting or replacement) is one of my
>next big things to implement. Then writing a simple keyword-spotter will be
>dead easy.
>
>As for the detailed reporting, that will come with a keyword-spotting
>content filter.



Just wondering...has any progress been made on this?  My need is really
more focused toward being able to FULLY stop PROFANE language inbound or
outbound for several domains...so a rules based approach makes my life VERY
easy.

Thanks for great software all!

CT