On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Thomas Eckardt <thomas.ecka...@thockar.com
> wrote:
>
> >I'm wondering if you should pose your question as a new thread so that
> others who typically ignore threads that they're not originally a part of
> could chime in.
>
> This is the development test list - I expect, that every thread is read by
> everyone.
>
But you know they don't. Your call, just a suggestion.
>
>
> >I definitely don't understand the good and blocked syntax of the current
>
> address can be sender and/or recipient (both local and/or foreign)
> block = block-in + block-out
> block-in - for incoming mails
> block-out for outgoing mails
> same for good
>
> rule:
>
> block if
> the mail and flow direction matches a defined block rule
> or
> the mail and flow direction NOT matches a defined good rule
>
>
> just simple - isn't it?
>
> from the GUI
> ..At least one of the above option must be defined in a line - a maximum
> of all (six) could be defined, if this makes sense.....
>
> This should and it is confusing (means read again) .... 'all six' makes
> never sense!!!!
>
Yes, but it's unclear if good means that's all that is allowed or if it's
an override of block.
And then what happens with inheritance if an inherited policy has a block
only, line that inherits that has a good, etc.
And that's why I suggested the - negation syntax, to clear this up. it's
simple for you, but despite reading the gui many times over and over on
this section it's not crystal clear as to what happens now. So, as long as
you're reworking this section, I'm suggesting the simplication.
>
> >URL blocking
>
I'm sorry, this was an absolutely terrible choice of *file extension* on my
part. We're blocking the .url extension. Same questions below but this
time with the .doc extension for clarity:
Good / Block and inheritance
~policyname => block => exe\-bin|doc|bla
I definitely don't understand the good and blocked syntax of the current
UserAttach implementation. I think that could use some clarification in
the gui. If you're reworking the UserAttach concept, maybe we could change
this?
If policy1 is defined as above, and we want to remove URL blocking for a
user, how would we do that?
* => policy1
allowwordfileu...@domain.com => good => doc
Would that add of doc to good, thereby negating the block inherited from
policy1?
Does adding good to the user make it so that doc is the ONLY type that
person can receive?
* => policy1
(-i)allowwordfileu...@domain.com => block => policy1|-doc
in this above example, that user has inheritance turned off, gets policy1
and -doc removed from that list
or
* => policy1
allowwordfileu...@domain.com => block => -doc
Inheritance is on above, and doc is removed from that inherited list (I
think I like this syntax the best)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
