"Personal" spam filtering?

Post your MailEnable suggestions here.
Post Reply
Guest

"Personal" spam filtering?

Post by Guest »

Hello there, I have a rather "nerdy" suggestion: Years ago, when I had an old fashion UNIX login account, I had the administrator install "procmail", a package with some rather powerfull filtering abilities. You could set up rules in a grep-like manner, specify which part of the mail should be subject to the search, you could even configure it using both "exclude" and "include" rules. I ended up with a pretty exact filter - and then the account type was discontinued...
Anyway, I would like to have such rules back and more, only I never seem to come across a rule set, I really like, you always want to do more - discard mails containg BOTH this an that word, unless... and so on, but such a rule set will NEVER be easy to configure, so the effort needed to code it does not measure up to the increased value in sales, and I can understand that. So here comes the idea:
Specify an interface in your rule set, that will allow ME to write my own dll with filtering rules! The interface could simply be a single dll function taking parameters like the subject line, from line, body, and so on - or even just an unprocessed buffer with the entire thing with headers and all, and then I will be in charge of deciding what to do with it! The return value could be a simple TRUE for allow, FALSE for discard, or the return set could also give the possibility of sending the mail to an "observation" account, or it could even allow for the function to change the mail before it was delivered to the proper mailbox. Being a professional programmer, I would consider that to be a funny task - writing my own spam filter to be used by my favorite mail server - and the server can just ignore this extension if such a dll does not exist, so all users don't have to go and learn to write a dll, if they can live with the standard rules.
Of course, if the dll have the server crash, I am myself responsible, so some logging saying "now entering..." and "exiting from..." might be appropriate to "prove", in whose code it crashed.
It would be a different kind of plug-in, I know.
Just an idea...

Post Reply