Need clarification on whitelist rules

[Dan Spray]

That is the problem though.  I have a customer who has asked to be
whitelisted so I add them to the spam.whitelist.rules file.  Then a spam
message comes in and is addressed to 10 people, ONE of which is the customer
that wanted to be whitelisted.  The message however is declared whitelisted
and is delivered to all 10 people even though it is actually scored as spam.

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: MailScanner mailing list [mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf
Of Julian Field
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 9:32 AM
To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: Need clarification on whitelist rules

Only if you are deleting it and not delivering it to the people who didn't
whitelist it.
For each recipient, you can either
1) whitelist and deliver it
2) delete it
Then it's easy, and I've done it before.

At 14:34 06/10/2004, you wrote:
>Okay, so now that I am back in the office, is there anyway to avoid having
>all of the recipients whitelisted when just one of the recipients has
>requested to be whitelisted?
>
>Dan
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: MailScanner mailing list [mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On
Behalf
>Of Julian Field
>Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 10:04 AM
>To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
>Subject: Re: Need clarification on whitelist rules
>
>At 15:26 01/10/2004, you wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: MailScanner mailing list [mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK]On
> > > Behalf Of Julian Field
> > > Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 9:10 AM
> > > To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> > > Subject: Re: Need clarification on whitelist rules
> > >
> > >
> > > At 14:56 01/10/2004, you wrote:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: MailScanner mailing list
[mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK]On
> > > > > Behalf Of Julian Field
> > > > > Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 7:57 AM
> > > > > To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> > > > > Subject: Re: Need clarification on whitelist rules
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > ><snip>
> > > > >
> > > > > What you need is a Custom Function that edits the recipients
> > > list in each
> > > > > message, according to whether they want to be filtered or
> > > not. I've done
> > > > > something like this already, just haven't yet published it.
> > > > >
> > > > > What form would people like it in? Added to the per-user
> > > white and black
> > > > > list code?
> > > > > It would have to be a simple "remove them from the message if
> > > > > it's in their
> > > > > blacklist or not in their whitelist".
> > > > >
> > > > > Can people see any problems with this? Something is nagging
> > > me that this
> > > > > isn't the correct functionality, but I can't see what the
> > > right answer is
> > > > > for definite.
> > > > > --
> > > >
> > > >I guess my first question is how it's tagged as spam when there is a
>rule
> > > >file for the spam scoring settings? If user A tagges as spam
> > > with a score of
> > > >5.0 and user B tagges it with a score of 7.5 how does the message get
> > > >tagged, since a score of 6.5 would flag as spam for user A and
> > > ham for user
> > > >B?
> > >
> > > We use it only for automatic spam deletion. In your example, user A
>would
> > > be removed from the list of recipients, and it would be normally
>delivered
> > > to user B. To use it for anything other than spam deletion is pretty
>much
> > > impossible.
> > >
> > > --
> >
> >Isn't this what you are proposing above?
> >
> > > > > It would have to be a simple "remove them from the message if
> > > > > it's in their
> > > > > blacklist or not in their whitelist".
> >
> >so if you handle the white/black listing here if it's spam and
whitelisted
> >don't remove them and if it's ham but blacklisted do remove them, or am I
> >missing something?
>
>
> >  I would think where every the per user scoring is checked
> >if the whitelist/blacklist was checked as well it would simply adjust the
> >actual tagging as spam or ham the same as the scoring based tagging
would,
> >the difference being if it scores as 6.5 and the user threshold is 7.5
but
> >it's blacklisted it would be tagged as spam and not ham?
>
>I don't understand that sentence at all, sorry.
>
> >  I'm sorry if I am
> >coming across dense just looking for a way to simplify the overall code
> >changes
>
>--
>Julian Field
>www.MailScanner.info
>MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
>Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
>
>PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
>
>------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
>To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
>'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
>Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
>the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).
>
>------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
>To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
>'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
>Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
>the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store

PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).