[Spambayes] Other pop3proxy options

[Tim Stone - Four Stones Expressions]

We're getting very close to requiring a full blown mail client, not just a 
proxy.  Perhaps the solution to many problems is to provide a spambayes 
mailer, with training, retraining, etc. etc. all built in, and provide the 
proxy with necessarily limited function for those who don't wish to use the 
spambayes mailer.  This thought is daunting, but it really is the easiest from 
a useability standpoint.  - TimS

2/19/2003 5:14:42 PM, "Zander" <zander at zan.com> wrote:

>I also think that a rework to allow for "per-account" management/training
>would be much cooler.  I could then provide spam marking for my various
>accounts separately (and/or for my friends throuhg my server.
>
>Obviously, another would be to allow for some level of security/login on the
>HTTP server (maybe with a new account/login/password created for each POP3
>account that's used against the pop3proxy dynamically).
>
>I'd be happy to help out in any of this - I'm a devout Pythonista, but don't
>actually have that much experience ;-)
>
>- Z
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tim Stone - Four Stones Expressions" <tim at fourstonesExpressions.com>
>To: <ham>; "Zander" <zander at zan.com>; "Spambayes" <spambayes at python.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 2:26 PM
>Subject: Re: [Spambayes] Other pop3proxy options
>
>
>> Great set of requirements!  I'll make it so asap.  Watch the checkin
>list... -
>> TimS
>>
>> 2/19/2003 4:06:02 PM, "Zander" <zander at zan.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I think this will be necessary to change - because I can't seem to
>construct
>> >a filter in OE6 that will use your current To: <disposition>; ... munging
>> >strategy to classify my spam properly.  [Not only that, but a "Reply To
>All"
>> >gets awkward...]
>> >
>> >Your notes say something about  "contains 'spam' followed by a comma" -
>but
>> >that doesn't work in OE.  I tried contains "spam;" [followed by a
>> >semicolon - which is the address separator], but that too doesn't work.
>If
>> >I use "contains 'spam'" - obviously that's wrong because it pulls, for
>> >example, the spambayes mailinglist posts ;-)
>> >
>> >So... I think that the
>> >
>> >    a. To: munging doesn't work as written now in OE6 AFAICT.
>> >    b. There should be the option of To:, Subject; [or CC:, or whatever]
>> >munging (why not make it a variable)
>> >    c. The replace token should be configurable: ie: <null>,
>[***SPAM***],
>> >or [!@#Mycust0m Flag*&*&%].
>> >        i. The reason for including the <null> above is that *I* would
>> >prefer to leave 'ham' untouched, while marking SPAM obviously, and
>probably
>> >marking unsure subtly.
>> >
>> >- Z
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "Tim Stone - Four Stones Expressions"
><tim at fourstonesExpressions.com>
>> >To: <ham>; <SpamBayes at python.org>; "Zander" <zander at zan.com>
>> >Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 12:36 PM
>> >Subject: Re: [Spambayes] Other pop3proxy options
>> >
>> >
>> >> 2/19/2003 12:46:07 PM, "Zander" <zander at zan.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >I would like to extend the options for how disposition is identified
>by
>> >the
>> >> pop3proxy implementation.  In particular, I would like the option of
>> >> >
>> >> >A. X-Spambayes-Classification: <disposition>  as now
>> >> >B. To: XXXXX <disposition> as is in CVS now
>> >> >C. Subject line munging to append <disposition>
>> >> >
>> >> >Is there any reason that was not included? (beside the obvious
>potential
>> >for
>> >> a spammer to slip in a workaround)  I use Outlook Express, and
>obviously
>> >can't
>> >> use the arbitrary header technique - and am most interested in adding a
>> >> [***SPAM***] header so that I can correctly bucketize those messages -
>but
>> >> leave [***UNSURE***] in my primary box, and not molest ham messages at
>> >all.
>> >> >
>> >> >Is there any reason not to do this?  Would you accept it if I did?  Is
>> >there
>> >> any reason why you aren't using the email module Parser API to crack
>the
>> >> headers?
>> >>
>> >> Subject munging will be simple to add, and I can do it.  Stay tuned.
>> >>
>> >>   I have found a certain number of messages are not parsed correctly by
>> >the re
>> >> that you are using.  They show up as From: (none) Subj: (none) in the
>UI
>> >>
>> >> We've recently seen some problems with malformed mails.  We're
>examining
>> >this
>> >> issue (see the email package use thread)
>> >>
>> >>  - but I haven't determined why just yet (though I can see that some
>part
>> >of
>> >> the message is getting stuck with the header by your
>re.split(r'\n\r?\n',
>> >> messageText, 1) expression.
>> >> >
>> >> >- Z
>> >> >_______________________________________________
>> >> >Spambayes mailing list
>> >> >Spambayes at python.org
>> >> >http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> c'est moi - TimS
>> >> http://www.fourstonesExpressions.com
>> >> http://wecanstopspam.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> c'est moi - TimS
>> http://www.fourstonesExpressions.com
>> http://wecanstopspam.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>


c'est moi - TimS
http://www.fourstonesExpressions.com
http://wecanstopspam.org