ScanMail Message: To Sender, sensitive content found and action t aken. (fwd)

Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 23:07:49 -0400
From: System Attendant <MAIL-SA@syndesis.com>
To: 'John Fraizer' <nanog@Overkill.EnterZone.Net>
Subject: ScanMail Message: To Sender, sensitive content found and action
taken.

Trend SMEX Content Filter has detected sensitive content.

Place = measl@mfn.org; Steven J. Sobol; Johnny Eriksson; nanog@merit.edu;
postmaster@mfn.org;
Sender = John Fraizer
Subject = Re: Affects of the balkanization of mail blacklisting
Delivery Time = August 15, 2001 (Wednesday) 23:07:49
Policy = Sexual Discrimination
Action on this mail = Quarantine message

Warning message from administrator:
Sender, Content filter has detected a sensitive e-mail.

God! What on earth in my email was sexually discriminatory? I don't like
SPAMMERS. I don't care if they're male, female or hermaphrodite. No
discrimination. They should all be shot on site!

I got one of those too. I think it's because I said:

"it's more secure, but a batch to fix things from home" (s/ ba/ bi/)

Obligatory operational reference: Networks are being administered by
alledged humanoids of uncertain combinations of species, chromosome count,
and DNA configuration of X/Y/Z chromosomes, but who are sufficiently
lacking in cranial horsepower to be willing to accept that a simple
regexp will actually detect utterances designed to cause mental distress.
Their management has decided that they are mentally unable to look at an
E-mail, see that the mail originated elsewhere, and take up issues of
content with the author, and must be protected from possibly being so
upset by said content that they will sue upper management by accident,
thereby lowering shareholder return.

These same humanoids in need of protection from the basic realities of
E-mail on a worldwide network are also responsible for doing complicated tasks
like setting default routes on web servers.

/Valdis (who is perfectly aware that there isn't usually a Z :wink:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

lacking in cranial horsepower to be willing to accept that a simple
regexp will actually detect utterances designed to cause mental distress.

Regexp? Try substring matching. Globbing if you're lucky. The kind of
people who by this stuff are not the kind of people who will pick nits about
how it's done. Therefore, it is always implemented quick-and-dirty style,
just good enough to generate sales. More effort is put into the PPT
presentation than into the actual code.

- ---
"The avalanche has already begun. It is too late for the pebbles to vote" -
Kosh