Re: questions about blocking disclaimers

[Jonathan Larmour <jifl at jifvik dot org>]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 01:34:29AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > As many people know, I'm working on modifying the spam filter software
> > so that it will block email which contains unenforceable company
> > disclaimers.  I've been surveying the archives for samples of
> > disclaimers to seed the spam blocking regex.  I'd like to be able to
> > include the match that triggered the disclaimer bounce so that people
> > can see what is causing the problem but that may increase the size
> > of the bounce.  Is that ok, though?
> >
> > Here's what I have for the bounce message right now:

My only thought is that this might be sudden and dramatic for some people, 
who may find it difficult to remove them. Can it temporarily accept the 
message (with a warning that they will be rejected entirely soon), and 
after a month, we change it so we do reject them?

Out of interest I have had long arguments in my workplace about such 
disclaimers, and it has been alleged that EU Data Protection law (as 
applied in the UK at least) pretty much requires that any mail sent from a 
business (including any employees) has to include them. It was a hard fight 
to prevent them being added to all our email, and allegedly omitting them 
is being done at some risk to the company directors. I doubt this should 
change the policy, but it does show that the only solution people may have 
is not to post from their work at all, so giving them time to arrange an 
alternative would some reasonable.

I think the text of the bounce is fine (for when things do get dropped).

Jifl
--
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine