opt-in

[Randal, Phil]

I hate to say this, but why don't you give up and not allow opt-in?

And what if users say "we'll have spam, but block all objectionable
content"?.

What if corporate policies require you to prevent certain material from
reaching mailboxes?

I guess they don't, but maybe they should.

Cheers,

Phil

---------------------------------------------
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK

> -----Original Message-----
> From: MailScanner mailing list [mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK]On
> Behalf Of Don Newcomer
> Sent: 02 March 2004 13:26
> To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: opt-in
>
>
> We're using MailScanner 4.26.8 and we're in the process of testing
> SpamAssassin 2.63.  The plan is to adopt it site-wide but I
> like the idea
> of allowing users to "opt-in" to having their mail scanned
> for spam.  I set
> up a ruleset that's applied to the config parameters "Spam
> Checks" and "Use
> SpamAssassin".  It's working fine in testing but I've run into a few
> problems.  This ruleset is based on "to" addresses that
> determines whether
> spam checking is done.  Unfortunately, as you all know, we get lots of
> e-mail with forged headers that, based on the header
> information, shouldn't
> even appear in your mailbox.  This makes using this ruleset
> for opt-in a
> little ineffective.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to either (a) work
> around this
> problem or (b) a better way to allow opt-in?  Thanks in advance.
>
> ==============================================================
> ==================
> Don Newcomer
> Dickinson College
> Senior Manager, Systems                                 P.O. Box 1773
> newcomer at dickinson.edu
> Carlisle, PA  17013
>
> Phone: (717) 245-1256
>
> FAX: (717) 245-1690
>