Email retention possibility? |
Post Reply 
|
| Author | |
JeffHildebrand 
Newbie 
Joined: 26 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 15 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Email retention possibility?Posted: 06 September 2006 at 3:12pm |
|
I was wondering if you have considered adding on an email retention module to spam filter? It seems the ideal place to capture the email traffic, incomming and outgoing, without too much additional modification. At the simpilist implementation, it would store all incomming and outgoing email in the spam filter database, with possibly an additional field flagging that the email was delivered. All messages would still get purged after the 10 day cycle of spam. Additional options could be: - Archiving to a seperate database - Relevancy field, for example 0-255, 250+ Hard Copy Produced, 200-250 Hard copy required, 150-200 retain electronicly, 100-150 non-work related, <100 spam
|
|
 |
|
|
LogSat
Admin Group 
Joined: 25 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4104 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2006 at 4:13pm |
|
This is actually the second request for this feature in a few days. We've added it to the wishlist. Please "ping" us back in about a month, after we release the next major upgrade of SpamFilter to see if it can be implemented.
|
|
|
|
|
WebGuyz
Senior Member 
Joined: 09 May 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 348 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2006 at 5:50pm |
|
Any hints as to whats coming to whet our appetites.
|
|
|
http://www.webguyz.net
|
|
|
|
|
LogSat
Admin Group
Joined: 25 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4104 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2006 at 7:21pm |
|
It's SpamFilter Enterprise (new product line, but will be a free upgrade to all users with current software maintenance).
The main feature(s) is to have every filter now available be customizeable on a per-domain basis. Imagine having a "configuration" and a "Black / White List" tab available for every local domain... You'll be able to provide "domain administrators" individually the ability to configure most of the filters and black/white lists for their domain. Most of the settings will be stored in the database for ease of administration via custom web interfaces. As we don't want to risk downtime when the database is unavailable however, and to optimize performance, ALL of the database settings are automatcially flushed to local text files, and SpamFilter will work off the text files, not the database. We are working also (phase 2) on allowing individual end-user adding blacklist/whitelist entries in domains and emails, so each person can control their own email account. These settings are also stored in a database (then flushed to local text files). Phase 1 is just a handful of weeks away from a beta version. |
|
|
|
|
WebGuyz
Senior Member
Joined: 09 May 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 348 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2006 at 7:25pm |
|
Does the same go for the autowhitelistdelivery.txt file? Is that per domain? Thanks! |
|
|
http://www.webguyz.net
|
|
|
|
|
LogSat
Admin Group
Joined: 25 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4104 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2006 at 7:29pm |
|
it currently (in our internal alpha builds) is, but we may change that later (more not than yes...)
|
|
|
|
|
WebGuyz
Senior Member
Joined: 09 May 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 348 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2006 at 7:52pm |
|
I think you need to consider making it per domain for the final version. Thats the biggest problem with the current SFI is that one file can get huge. We have some customers who make payday loans and they are contanstanly adding new users to their whitelists. Even though the autowhitelistdelivery mechanism was never intended to be used the way it is, we grab all outgoing email address (at our outgoing mail server) from our customers to their clients and using scripts create the FROM | TO pairs in autowhitelistdelivery.txt which cuts down on a lot of rejected messages. Especially those who have been getting email fine for years from a friend then all of a sudden that sender usees a word or phrase that triggers a keyword filter and then they are all in my face wanting to know why they have been able to get mail from a user for years but now its blocked. Of course our autowhitelistdelivery.txt file is 6 meg and growing so I think a separate one per domain would be almost necessary. Anyone else have an opinion about autowhitelistdelivery.txt file per domain? Speak now before it doesn't happen ... |
|
|
http://www.webguyz.net
|
|
|
|
|
LogSat
Admin Group
Joined: 25 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4104 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2006 at 8:11pm |
|
Be optimistic
 The "not" was meant that the autowhitelist, in our alpha builds, is indeed per-domain, and that, most likely, this was *not* going to change in the final version. |
|
|
|
|
WebGuyz
Senior Member
Joined: 09 May 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 348 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2006 at 11:14pm |
|
|
|
|
http://www.webguyz.net
|
|
|
|
|
WebGuyz
Senior Member
Joined: 09 May 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 348 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 September 2006 at 1:36am |
|
Since I've hijacked this thread (sorry jeff) I hope you reconsider making (in SFE) logging an option to keep it as it is, or be able log to the sql server. If your going to add all that capability to SFE, then reporting is going to be must and the ability to do real time queries against a sql db would be required. While SawMill may be the cats meow, I don't see how it would be possible to get realtime reporting since it has to import the text file. Nag, nag, nag |
|
|
http://www.webguyz.net
|
|
|
|
|
caratking
Groupie 
Joined: 13 March 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 79 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 September 2006 at 9:18am |
|
Wow! I think I'm in heaven!
|
|
|
|
|
__M__
Groupie
Joined: 30 August 2006 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 75 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 September 2006 at 9:57pm |
|
caratking's in heaven! Lucky you, all I have is an erection. (But a damn good one) Roberto, these proposed changes for SFE are superb and are exactly what I was hoping would come out eventually. A per-domain quarantine option would also rock. The more I use this program and the more I see of Roberto's support the more I am so pleased that I purchased this product over the others I evaluated. Keep up the good work, I can't wait for the Beta. |
|
|
|
|
WebGuyz
Senior Member
Joined: 09 May 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 348 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08 September 2006 at 2:22pm |
You need to get out more .. |
|
|
http://www.webguyz.net
|
|
|
|
|
__M__
Groupie
Joined: 30 August 2006 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 75 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 September 2006 at 9:31am |
|
Roberto, since teasing us with the main SFE features I have been
wondering if you could possibly confirm whether we will have the
ability to enable/disable the quarantine function for individual local
domains.
I have several domains that we don't need to quarantine the rejected messages for and I'd rather not clog up a MySQL database with messages that will never get looked at let alone released. This may be a current feature of SFI but I cannot see how this is currently possible. I'll continue to haunt the LogSat website for the Beta release of SFE, I'm excited!!!! Thanks again for your continued support of SFI. Regards, Mike |
|
|
|
|
LogSat
Admin Group
Joined: 25 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4104 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 September 2006 at 4:24pm |
|
That's currently the functionality we're working on this very week. We're trying to allow you to enable/disable the quarantine for every filter as you can now, and in addition being able to customize that for every single local domain.
A little bit more patience, we ourselves did not realize how many options we had in our own software ... and are needing to reorganize every single one so it can be customized per domain. In a few more weeks we'll have a beta out, hopefully. |
|
|
|
|
__M__
Groupie
Joined: 30 August 2006 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 75 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 September 2006 at 8:25pm |
|
Roberto, thanks for the clarification.
Certainly not trying to be pushy, I appreciate how important it is to not rush out a release just to please the fans. Looking forward to seeing the result of your hardwork. M |
|
|
|
|
RicM
Newbie
Joined: 20 September 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 September 2006 at 1:18pm |
|
Roberto - Getting back to the original point of the thread - the retention module - and then hijacking it again... **IF** the retention module is built, this could serve as the groundwork for submitting spam that slips through back to SpamFilterISP so the bayesian filter can learn about it... Just a hope and a prayer... -Ric |
|
|
|
|
LogSat
Admin Group
Joined: 25 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4104 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22 September 2006 at 8:13pm |
|
The good news is that **IF** the new functionality for the retention is built, that additional functionality to allow the Bayesian filter to learn about good emails is already ready...!
|
|
|
|
|
JeffHildebrand
Newbie
Joined: 26 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 15 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 December 2006 at 10:18am |
|
*ping*, any futher developments along implementing an email retention capability with spam filter :)
|
|
|
|
|
LogSat
Admin Group
Joined: 25 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4104 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 December 2006 at 2:28pm |
|
Not yet. We're currently adding the ability to "split" incoming emails in case a recipient is whitelisted but the others are not (allowing the whitelisted ones to receive an email, while blocking it for the others). We're also adding the "splitting" of emails in case the recipients have different domains, and each domain should be forwarded to a different SMTP server. These are quite challenging upgrades, and have taken some time. We'll include them in the next beta, and after that we'll probably work on the retension.
|
|
|
|
Topic Options
__M__ wrote:
|
Post Reply
|
|
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.287 seconds.