An ODBC datasource is certainly easy to manage remotely...but I'm sure it would slow the processing down if the declude process were to include the overhead of talking to a database. However, there's no reason the info can't be stored in a database and exported to the appropriate config file on-demand or on-change. Just have a process to apply database changes to the config files.
In fact, why stop with just one config item like the whitelist...what if the whole of configuration could be stored in a relational database and edited via a web interface...with an apply changes button to write out a new config file(s). It might also be nice to have the ability to store different configurations for testing...or similar to routers and firewalls show a running vs. stored configuration. Thoughts? Darin. ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. Scott Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 9:29 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist/blacklist question... > > >Could it be possible to have an option to use an ODBC datasource for the > >whitelist and blacklist tests? > > It's unlikely, but something that we will consider. > > >My thought is that email is MUCH more critical for this situation where > >if a home user looses a piece of mail because of a false positive it's > >not as bad... Ok we could debate that later but hear me out... > > Just one quick note here. Whitelisting is meant as a last resort, for > E-mail that you absolutely, positively must have, and where the sender > won't fix their problems. > > It has the same drawback that filtering does -- it can catch a lot of stuff > it shouldn't. Just as you don't want a filter to catch all mail from Dr. > Dick Hitchcock, people have seen a sudden increase in spam when > whitelisting "mail.com" (which ends up whitelisting @hotmail.com, a popular > return address for spammers). > > >Using an ODBC datasource might speed up Junkmail's processing because it > >could issue SQL select queries to a persistently open database. > > Actually, Declude JunkMail's current whitelisting would likely be faster. > > >Additionally, I could write an ASP front end to modify the white/black > >list easier. > > If the 200 item limit were removed (something we will have to do > eventually), would that make a difference? Going to ODBC is going to > involve a lot of extra work, that might be only minimally useful. > -Scott > > --- > [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] > > --- > > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". You can E-mail > [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. You can visit our web > site at http://www.declude.com . > --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". You can E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. You can visit our web site at http://www.declude.com .
