Prakash kumar writes:
I am very sorry but I could not fully understand our last discussion. Are you trying to say that I should work on sanitizing the message and building a spam filter?
There are two possible responses to a message that contains content that we suspect the user doesn't want distributed. (1) Don't send the message (this is what I meant by stop/hold). (2) Remove or obscure the sensitive information (this is what I meant by body filtering, that is, filter out sensitive terms but let the rest of the message go through).
It is not obvious to me that sanitizing the message is a good idea, although it's probably easy to implement (just substitute "[redacted]" or a similar string for each occurance of sensitive information detected) once you have a good filter. However, probably these filters will be built by "ordinary folks" who don't specialize in natural language processing, and they are unlikely to be able to write appropriate regexps.
As for writing a spam filter, no, that's not appropriate for Mailman org. There are plenty of good ones (SpamAssassin, SpamBayes) already, so writing a handler to integrate one or more of them would be the right way to go.
I'm still not happy[1] with the idea of multiple "plugins" as a single project, but it might be reasonable to assemble a battery of pluging that handle several kinds of abuse (the body content filter, plus SpamAssassin, plus ClamAV) for example.
Footnotes: [1] That means that given a choice of a single-task proposal and a multi-plugin proposal of similar quality, I would definitely choose the single-task proposal to mentor. Other mentors may feel differently.