Re: why not doing a test that checks "name"-<email address> pairs

At 23:58 17-08-2007, aag_uk wrote:
> >a) is probably going to be quite resource-intensive;
>
>I don´t really know, according to

Compared to all the checks performed on a message, it isn't.

>My idea was that you could have a list that links each recipient to possible
>names that could be used (basically first name, surname and possibly a short
>name), not necesary NIS or LDAP. About fuzzy matching I think it shouldn't
>be difficult to do. It´s something like what Google does when you misspell
>something or enter something that is not "usual", it suggests you another
>search and, in my opinion, its guess is usually very good.

That's not how "names" work in practice. It may take more than a lookup in your system database.

It's not difficult but it requires some work to understand the naming conventions. That may not be possible in a heterogeneous environment. The fuzzy matching is not that easy. Once you get into that, you turn the process into a resource intensive one.

>well, maybe if you have thousands of users in your domain and you want to
>enter the names-recipient links (as I explained in the previous paragraph)
>for the first time, it will require a lot of work. In my case I have about
>100 recipients and from time to time I have to add new ones; so, that
>wouldn't be a problem.

It's only a name/recipient link if we make an assumption about the "display name". Once this becomes a general rule, it will be circumvented.

I already have one case where this rule would have the adverse of the intended effect.

Do you need help?
In addition to our free technical library, Pantek provides professional IT services to companies who utilize Open Source software: Learn more about Pantek's Technical Support offerings Place an order for 24/7/365 Technical Support here Learn more about Pantek, who we are, and what we do Chat with a Live Operator Related spamassassin.apache.org Links users Request more information about Pantek

Regards,
-sm Received on Sat Aug 18 11:09:13 2007