Re: mail filtering policy
From: Richard Hunt (richard.2002.munged@no.sp.am.attbi.not.net)
Date: 03/23/03
- Next message: Heather: "Re: Microsoft Warns of New Windows Flaw (March 19, 2003 )"
- Previous message: Bill Blanton: "Re: Microsoft Warns of New Windows Flaw (March 19, 2003 )"
- In reply to: Doug Fox: "mail filtering policy"
- Next in thread: G. Morgan: "Re: mail filtering policy"
- Reply: Doug Fox: "Re: mail filtering policy"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: "Richard Hunt" <richard.2002.munged@no.sp.am.attbi.not.net> Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 05:33:56 GMT
"Doug Fox" <dfox168@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:sS2fa.29864$Dtv1.21538@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> Our firewall blocks incoming mail if there are over 50 recipients in the
cc
> (carbon copy) field. One day, a customer sent us a mail with over 50
> recipients, therefore the firewall blocked the mail. This customer
reported
> the situation to its contacts at work. As a result, we are instructed to
> allow over 100 recipients in the cc field.
>
I can't resist asking: was it a legitimate business email, or a joke
picture?
> As I understand, the filtering policy is to prevent spamming, prevent mail
> generated by worms, etc.
>
> How do most companies handle this situation? How many recipients are
> allowed in the cc field?
>
My company would keep the 50 recipient rule, but whitelist the customer; a
whitelist is a list of senders whose mail will be passed without any other
filtering.
Actually, I think the filter is constructed as follows:
1. examine attachments for virus, reject if found.
2. examine subject & message for virus text tags, reject if found.
3. if sender on whitelist, pass.
4. if sender on blacklist, pass.
5. apply word list to subject & message, reject if spam.
6. apply other rules, etc
A human being is supposed to review the rejected messages, and apply human
judgement to the messages which have been incorrectly identified. Sometimes
they don't.
Richard
- Next message: Heather: "Re: Microsoft Warns of New Windows Flaw (March 19, 2003 )"
- Previous message: Bill Blanton: "Re: Microsoft Warns of New Windows Flaw (March 19, 2003 )"
- In reply to: Doug Fox: "mail filtering policy"
- Next in thread: G. Morgan: "Re: mail filtering policy"
- Reply: Doug Fox: "Re: mail filtering policy"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|