Abstract:
An apparatus and method are disclosed for selectively filtering and inspecting incoming e-mail. The steps to selectively filter and inspect incoming e-mail include: assigning a risk value to each section of an incoming e-mail, presenting the incoming e-mail with sections blocked based on the risk value, and selectively disclosing blocked sections of the e-mail to a reviewer based on input from the reviewer. The method provides a way for a reviewer to filter risky e-mails based on multiple criteria, and safely review filtered e-mails to ensure legitimate e-mails are not incorrectly filtered.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
   1. Field of the Invention 
   This invention relates to filtering e-mail, and more particularly relates to allowing a user to more safely inspect and accept filtered e-mail. 
   2. Description of the Related Art 
   E-mail filtering systems are a critical component of the business world today. Some filtering systems, called spam filters, try to weed out unsolicited and undesirable e-mail that clogs the user&#39;s inbox and reduces productivity. Other filters may try to block e-mails with offensive text or pictures, e-mails with imbedded scripts or executable code, and other types of content that present a security or work environment risk. While the current e-mail filtering technology can be quite sophisticated, it still suffers from a number of drawbacks. 
   The most important drawback of the current e-mail filtering technology is that all filtered e-mails are treated the same, and as a practical matter are typically made unavailable to the user. Some useful e-mails may be incorrectly filtered, and the unavailability of good e-mails trapped by the filters is an important enough problem that email service providers are considering a pay-per-email system that allows legitimate e-mailers to pay their way through the filtering system to ensure that legitimate e-mails get delivered. Once an e-mail is filtered in the current technology, the user may be able to find and accept that e-mail only by accessing a junk e-mail location and sorting through potentially thousands of e-mails filled with offensive and/or risky content. 
   A second drawback of the current e-mail filtering technology is that e-mail is accepted or rejected on a pass-fail basis only. Thus, the user has no control over the treatment of potentially useful e-mails, and an e-mail which narrowly meets filtering criteria is treated no differently than an e-mail which is obviously spam. Further, the user has no safe reviewing method for filtered e-mails, where they can peek at relatively safe content or portions of the content before deciding whether to accept or reject the e-mail. 
   From the foregoing discussion, it should be apparent that a need exists for an apparatus and method that allows a more nuanced filtering method than a simple pass/fail check to block an e-mail. Beneficially, such an apparatus and method would allow the user to safely review blocked or partially blocked e-mail such that good e-mails are not filtered improperly and thereby made unavailable the user. 
   SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
   The present invention has been developed in response to the present state of the art, and in particular, in response to the problems and needs in the art that have not yet been fully solved by currently available e-mail filtering technology. Accordingly, the present invention has been developed to provide an apparatus, a computer program product, and a method for partially blocking potentially risky e-mail content, and for selectively reviewing blocked e-mails to recover those that may contain legitimate content. 
   An apparatus is provided with modules and functional elements configured to execute the necessary steps of blocking and selectively inspect filtered e-mail. These modules in the described embodiments include a risk assessment module, a risk management module, and a review interface. 
   The risk assessment module, in one embodiment, is configured to assign a risk value to each section of an incoming e-mail. The sections of an incoming e-mail may include a subject line, a text body of the e-mail, an embedded image, one or more attachments, and embedded executable code. In a further embodiment, the risk assessment module may determine a set of constituent risk values for each section of the incoming e-mail, and assign the risk value to each section based on the set of constituent risk values. The risk value for a section may be set to the maximum constituent risk value from the set of constituent risk values for that section. The constituent risk values may correspond to a set of risk categories. In one embodiment, the risk categories may be offensive language, unsolicited sales language, the presence of a picture, the presence of executable code, and information about the sender. 
   The risk management module, in one embodiment, is configured to present the incoming e-mail to a reviewer. The risk management module may block sections of the e-mail deemed to be a risk by comparing the risk value of the section to a risk value scale. Sections without a risk value or a with a risk value that fails to satisfy a risk value threshold are displayed without any blocking. 
   The review interface module may be configured to selectively disclose blocked sections of the incoming e-mail message to the reviewer in response to user input from the reviewer. In one embodiment, the reviewer can change the risk value scale of a selected e-mail to disclose more sections of the e-mail and enable a better determination of whether a particular e-mail should be permitted. In another embodiment, the reviewer may select specific sections of an e-mail to be disclosed to give the reviewer more information on whether a selected e-mail is legitimate. 
   The apparatus may further include an adaptation module and a user customization module configured to learn the reviewing habits and/or risk tolerance level of the reviewer. In one embodiment, the adaptation module may be configured to record the risk value assigned to a section of an incoming e-mail, and to record the user input regarding the incoming e-mail. The adaptation module may store a user profile containing information derived from the recorded values. The customization module may be configured to modify which sections of future e-mails may be disclosed according to the user profile. Thus, the adaptation and user customization modules may work together to learn and emulate the risk management habits of the reviewer. 
   The apparatus may further include an administrator rules module configured to use administrator rules when blocking and selectively reviewing sections of e-mail messages. The administrator rules module may be configured read administrator rules data from a mail server. The administrator rules module may then apply the administrator rules data when the risk management module assigns risk values to each section of the incoming e-mail. In an alternative embodiment, the administrator rules module may apply the administrator rules data when the risk management module blocks sections of the incoming e-mail. 
   The apparatus may further include user preferences module configured to use user preferences when blocking and selectively reviewing e-mail. The user preferences module may be configured read user preferences data from a mail server. The user preferences module may then apply the user preferences data when the risk management module assigns risk values to each section of the incoming e-mail. In an alternative embodiment, the user preferences module may apply the user preferences data when the risk management module blocks sections of the incoming e-mail. 
   A computer program product of the present invention is presented to filter and selectively review e-mail. The computer program product may include the logic necessary to assign a risk value to each section of an incoming e-mail message, to block sections of an incoming e-mail based on a risk value scale, to present the incoming e-mail to a reviewer having sections blocked, and to selectively disclose sections of the e-mail message based on user input. The computer program product may further include the logic necessary to accept user input in the form of a Graphical User Interface (GUI) slider defining a risk value threshold, where the computer program product blocks or discloses sections of the incoming e-mail based on the risk value associated with each section of the incoming e-mail and the setting of the GUI slider. 
   In a further embodiment, the computer program product may include the logic necessary to accept user input as a series of binary selections, wherein each binary selection corresponds to a section of the incoming e-mail, and the state of each binary selection determines whether the corresponding section of the incoming e-mail is blocked or disclosed. The computer program product may further include the logic necessary to read administrator rules data, and assign the risk value to each section of an incoming e-mail message based on the administrator rules data. The computer program product may further include the logic necessary to read user preferences data, and assign the risk value to each section of an incoming e-mail message based on the user preferences data. 
   A method of the present invention is also presented to selectively review automatically filtered e-mail. In one embodiment, the method includes installing an e-mail screening tool on a mail server, and executing the e-mail screening tool. The e-mail screening tool may assign a risk value for each section of an incoming e-mail, present the incoming e-mail to a reviewer such that sections of the e-mail are blocked based on a risk value scale, and selectively disclose blocked sections of the incoming e-mail message to the reviewer in response to user input. In a further embodiment, the method may include receiving risk criteria from a system administrator, and entering the risk criteria as administrator rules data. Executing the e-mail screening tool may further comprise reading the administrator rules data, and adjusting the risk value for each section of the incoming e-mail based on the administrator rules data. 
   Reference throughout this specification to features, advantages, or similar language does not imply that all of the features and advantages that may be realized with the present invention should be or are in any single embodiment of the invention. Rather, language referring to the features and advantages is understood to mean that a specific feature, advantage, or characteristic described in connection with an embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the present invention. Thus, discussion of the features and advantages, and similar language, throughout this specification may, but do not necessarily, refer to the same embodiment. 
   Furthermore, the described features, advantages, and characteristics of the invention may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments. One skilled in the relevant art will recognize that the invention may be practiced without one or more of the specific features or advantages of a particular embodiment. In other instances, additional features and advantages may be recognized in certain embodiments that may not be present in all embodiments of the invention. 
   These features and advantages of the present invention will become more fully apparent from the following description and appended claims, or may be learned by the practice of the invention as set forth hereinafter. 

   
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
     In order that the advantages of the invention will be readily understood, a more particular description of the invention briefly described above will be rendered by reference to specific embodiments that are illustrated in the appended drawings. Understanding that these drawings depict only typical embodiments of the invention and are not therefore to be considered to be limiting of its scope, the invention will be described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings, in which: 
       FIG. 1  is a schematic block diagram depicting one embodiment of system for selectively reviewing automatically filtered e-mail in accordance with the present invention; 
       FIG. 2  is a schematic block diagram depicting one embodiment of an e-mail screening tool in accordance with the present invention; 
       FIG. 3  is a schematic block diagram depicting an alternative embodiment of an e-mail screening tool in accordance with the present invention; 
       FIG. 4A  illustrates one embodiment of a risk value assigned to each section of an incoming e-mail in accordance with the present invention; 
       FIG. 4B  illustrates one embodiment of a GUI slider in accordance with the present invention; 
       FIG. 5  illustrates one embodiment of a plurality of GUI components in accordance with the present invention; 
       FIG. 6  is a schematic flow chart illustrating one embodiment of a method to filter and selectively review e-mail in accordance with the present invention; and 
       FIG. 7  is a schematic flow chart illustrating one embodiment of a method to selectively review automatically filtered e-mail in accordance with the present invention. 
   

   DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
   Many of the functional units described in this specification have been labeled as modules, in order to more particularly emphasize their implementation independence. For example, a module may be implemented as a hardware circuit comprising custom VLSI circuits or gate arrays, off-the-shelf semiconductors such as logic chips, transistors, or other discrete components. A module may also be implemented in programmable hardware devices such as field programmable gate arrays, programmable array logic, programmable logic devices or the like. 
   Modules may also be implemented in software for execution by various types of processors. An identified module of executable code may, for instance, comprise one or more physical or logical blocks of computer instructions which may, for instance, be organized as an object, procedure, or function. Nevertheless, the executables of an identified module need not be physically located together, but may comprise disparate instructions stored in different locations which, when joined logically together, comprise the module and achieve the stated purpose for the module. 
   Indeed, a module of executable code may be a single instruction, or many instructions, and may even be distributed over several different code segments, among different programs, and across several memory devices. Similarly, operational data may be identified and illustrated herein within modules, and may be embodied in any suitable form and organized within any suitable type of data structure. The operational data may be collected as a single data set, or may be distributed over different locations including over different storage devices, and may exist, at least partially, merely as electronic signals on a system or network. 
   Reference throughout this specification to “one embodiment,” “an embodiment,” or similar language means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the present invention. Thus, appearances of the phrases “in one embodiment,” “in an embodiment,” and similar language throughout this specification may, but do not necessarily, all refer to the same embodiment. 
   Furthermore, the invention can take the form of a computer program product accessible from a computer-usable or computer-readable medium providing program code for use by or in connection with a computer or any instruction execution system. For the purposes of this description, a computer-usable or computer readable medium can be any apparatus that can contain, store, communicate, propagate, or transport the program for use by or in connection with the instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. 
   The medium can be an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system (or apparatus or device) or a propagation medium. Examples of a computer-readable medium include a semiconductor or solid state memory, magnetic tape, a removable computer diskette, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), a rigid magnetic disk and an optical disk. Current examples of optical disks include compact disk-read only memory (CD-ROM), compact disk-read/write (CD-R/W) and DVD. 
   Furthermore, the described features, structures, or characteristics of the invention may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments. In the following description, numerous specific details are provided, such as examples of programming, software modules, user selections, network transactions, database queries, database structures, hardware modules, hardware circuits, hardware chips, etc., to provide a thorough understanding of embodiments of the invention. One skilled in the relevant art will recognize, however, that the invention may be practiced without one or more of the specific details, or with other methods, components, materials, and so forth. In other instances, well-known structures, materials, or operations are not shown or described in detail to avoid obscuring aspects of the invention. 
     FIG. 1  is a schematic block diagram depicting one embodiment of system  100  for selectively reviewing automatically filtered e-mail in accordance with the present invention. The system  100  may comprise an incoming e-mail  102  which passes into a mail server  110 . The mail server  110  sends the e-mail  102  to an e-mail screening utility  112  configured to automatically filter the e-mail and present the filtered e-mail to a reviewer  104  via a computer  106  in communication with the mail server  110 . The reviewer  104  may access the filtered e-mail through a tool or data location separate from a regular e-mail inbox. The reviewer  104  may send user input  108  back to the mail server  110  via a computer  106 . 
   The system  100  may further comprise a system administrator  114  who may communicate preferences and requirements for the e-mail screening tool  112  to a technician  116  that installs software on the mail server  110 . In some embodiments, the system administrator  114 , the technician  116 , and even the reviewer  104  may be the same person. In some embodiments, more than one person may fill the roles of the system administrator  114 , the technician  116 , and the reviewer  104 . For example, in one embodiment, a computer system administrator  114  may provide some requirements for the e-mail screening tool  112  for computer security purposes, while a human resources manager  114  may provide some requirements for the e-mail screening tool  112  for a company spam e-mail policy implementation. 
     FIG. 2  is a schematic block diagram depicting one embodiment of an e-mail screening tool  112  in accordance with the present invention. In one embodiment, the e-mail screening tool  112  may comprise a risk assessment module  202  configured to receive an incoming e-mail  102  from a mail server  110 . The risk assessment module may be further configured to assign a risk value  204  to each section of the e-mail  102 . The risk value  204  may comprise a number, a Boolean, or a risk label. For example, the risk value  204  could be number between 1 and 100 where 1 is associated with very little risk, and 100 is associated with significant risk; the risk value  204  could be TRUE or FALSE, where TRUE indicates a risky value and FALSE indicates a not risky value; or the risk value  204  could be a value selected from a set of risk labels, such as “LOW RISK,” “MODERATE RISK,” and “SEVERE RISK.” Other schemes, ranges, and classifications for setting up a risk value will be understood by one of skill in the art and are contemplated within the scope of the present invention. 
   The sections of the e-mail  102  may comprise any discrete element of the e-mail  102  which is separable from the rest of the e-mail  102 . Examples of sections of the e-mail  102  may include the subject line, the text of the e-mail body, the “From” line, the “To” line, attachments to the e-mail  102 , images embedded in the e-mail  102 , and information about the sender of the e-mail  102 . This list is not meant to be exhaustive, and any information related to the e-mail  102  that assists the practitioner of the present invention with understanding the risk associated with a particular e-mail  102  should be understood to be available as a section. For example, if the originating time of day of the e-mail  102  were thought by a practitioner to be helpful in determining the risk level of a particular e-mail  102 , the originating time of day could be a section of the e-mail  102 . 
   In a further embodiment, the risk assessment module  202  may be configured to determine a set of constituent risk values for each section of the incoming e-mail  102  corresponding to a set of risk categories. A constituent risk value may be a risk value determined for a single section of an incoming e-mail  102  according to the content of that section related to one of a set of risk categories, and in some embodiments the constituent risk values may be used as part of a calculation to assign a risk value to the corresponding section of the e-mail  102 . For example, a constituent risk value may reflect the risk inherent in the degree of offensive language present in the text body of the e-mail  102 . Without limitation, the set of risk categories may comprise offensive language, unsolicited sales language, the presence of a picture, the presence of executable code, and information about the sender of the e-mail  102 . Every section of the e-mail may not apply to each risk category. For example, an attachment may be checked for whether it is executable versus non-executable data, and whether the title of the attachment contains offensive language or unsolicited sales language. However, the attachment may not contain information about the sender and may not have a constituent risk value for sender information. 
   The risk value for a section, in one embodiment, can be determined as a function of the constituent risk values. For example, the risk value for a section may be determined by adding all of the constituent risk values. In another example, some constituent risk values may be added while others are multiplied. For example, the risk value for the attachment section may be the risk associated with the attachment name, plus the risk associated with the attachment type (e.g. data, image, audio, video, executable), multiplied by the risk value associated with the presence of the attachment (0=no attachment, 2=attachment). In the example, the risk associated with the attachment section of an e-mail  102  containing no attachment would automatically be zero. Other functions and manipulations of constituent risk values are within the skill of one in the art. 
   In one embodiment, the risk assessment module  202  may be configured to assign a risk value to the corresponding section of the e-mail  102  by selecting the highest constituent risk value from the set of constituent risk values for that section. In an example embodiment, the text body section of the e-mail  102  may contain a constituent risk value of 85 for the offensive language category, and a constituent risk value of 75 for the unsolicited sales language category. Thus, the text body section has multiple constituent risk values. Consequently, the risk assessment module  202  may assign a risk value of 85 to the text body section of the e-mail  102  by selecting the highest constituent risk value from the set of constituent risk values for that section. 
   The e-mail screening tool  112  may further comprise a risk management module  206  configured to present the incoming e-mail message  102  to a reviewer  104  as a selectively disclosed message  208  such that sections of the e-mail  102  are blocked based on a risk value scale. 
   A blocked section as used herein indicates that the blocked section will not be available for the user to see, read, play or otherwise be exposed to the content of the blocked section in an e-mail review window. In certain embodiments, the blocking of a section may be complete or partial. For example, if the subject line section is blocked from the user, the entire subject line may be blocked, or the subject line may be shown with potentially offensive words hidden or removed. Further, blocking may involve complete removal of the section from the e-mail  102 . 
   A disclosed section as used herein indicates that the section will be available for the user to see, read, play or otherwise be exposed to the content of the section in an e-mail review window. In certain embodiments, the disclosure of a section may be complete or partial. For example, if some offensive language in the text body rates a lower risk value than other offensive language, in some embodiments the lower risk language may be disclosed while the higher risk language remains blocked. Further, disclosure may involve restoring the section to the e-mail  102  that was removed when the section was blocked. 
   In one embodiment, the risk management module  206  may be configured to block any sections of the e-mail  102  which contain content with a risk value  204  above a defined threshold on a risk value scale. For example, the risk management module  206  may be configured to block any sections of the e-mail  102  with a risk value  204  greater than “75.”In the example, if the e-mail  102  were deemed to have a risk value of “0” in all sections, except that the e-mail  102  has an embedded picture with a risk value of “90,” the selectively disclosed message  208  would comprise the e-mail  102  with the embedded picture blocked from the reviewer  104 . In an alternative embodiment, the risk management module  206  may be configured to block all sections except the subject line of an e-mail  102  which has any section with a risk value  204  greater than a defined threshold on a risk value scale. In a further embodiment, the risk management module  206  may be configured to block the subject line of an e-mail  102  which has a subject line with a risk value  204  greater than a defined threshold on a risk value scale. Of course other embodiments may include a risk value scale and risk value threshold for each section. 
   The e-mail screening tool  112  may further comprise a review interface  110  configured to selectively disclose sections of the e-mail  102  in response to user input  108  from a reviewer  104  through a computer  106 . In a first embodiment, the user input  108  may comprise activating a GUI slider where one end of the slider corresponds to a lowest possible risk threshold, and the other end corresponds to a highest possible risk threshold. 
   In the first embodiment, if the reviewer  104  places the GUI slider at the lowest level, all sections of the e-mail  102  would be blocked since all sections would be at least equal to the lowest risk threshold. If the reviewer  104  places the GUI slider at the highest level, all sections of the e-mail  102  would be revealed since all sections would be less than the highest risk threshold. As the reviewer  104  moves the GUI slider from the low level to the high level, progressively riskier sections of the e-mail  102  would be disclosed to the reviewer  104  by the review interface  110  until the reviewer  104  obtained enough information to determine whether the e-mail  102  should be removed from the filtered set or not. 
   In a second embodiment, the user input  108  may comprise activation of a plurality of GUI components, each GUI component associated with a section of the e-mail  102 . The GUI component may comprise checkboxes, radio buttons, or the like. In one example, an e-mail  102  may comprise three (3) sections—a subject line, text body, and embedded image. The GUI components may comprise three (3) check boxes associated with the three (3) sections, where a check in a box indicates that the associated section of the e-mail  102  should be shown. The GUI components could start checked or unchecked according to the determinations of the risk assessment module and the risk management module, and the reviewer  104  could activate a check box to disclose or block sections via the review interface  210 . 
   The e-mail screening tool  112  may further comprise an adaptation module  212  configured to generate a user profile  214  based on the risk value  204  assigned to each section of the incoming e-mail  102  and the user input  108 . The adaptation module  212  may be further configured to store the user profile  214 . The user profile  214  may contain information derived from the recorded risk values  204  and recorded user input  108 . The information stored in the user profile  214  may be used in an algorithm that adapts the output of the risk assessment module  202  and the risk management module  206  to the recorded risk values  204  and recorded user input  108 . 
   The e-mail screening tool  112  may further comprise a user customization module  216  configured to read the user profile  214  and modify the blocking for sections of the incoming e-mail  102  based on the user profile  214 . The user customization module  216  may be configured to communicate with the risk assessment module  202  and to communicate  218  with the risk management module  206  to modify the blocking of sections of the incoming e-mail  102 . The use of the user profile  214  to modify the blocking of sections of the incoming e-mail  102  is flexible, and four illustrative examples are provided, but many other uses are within the skill of one in the art. For the purposes of the examples, e-mail  102  sections which the reviewer  104  blocks or allows to remain blocked are called blocked sections, while e-mail  102  sections which the reviewer  104  unblocks or allows to remain unblocked are called disclosed sections. 
   In the first example, assume a risk value threshold for the text body section of e-mails  102  is 50 for a given reviewer  104 . Further assume that the reviewer  104  reviews 1000 e-mails for a given month. The adaptation module  212  may record the risk value  204  for the text body section of each e-mail  102 , and the user input  108  for each e-mail  102  determining whether the text body section of a given e-mail  102  is blocked or disclosed. Assume that the text body section of 700 e-mails  102  for the example month are disclosed, and that the average risk value  204  for the text body section of those e-mails is 65. Further assume that the text body section of 300 e-mails  102  for the example month are blocked, and that the average risk value  204  for the text body section of those e-mails is 90. In one embodiment, the adaptation module  212  may record a user profile  214  indicating for text body sections, the reviewer  104  blocked 300 sections with an average risk value of 90, and disclosed 700 sections with an average risk value of 65. For the first example, the user customization module  216  may read the user profile  214 , and communicate with the risk management module  206  to move the risk value threshold for the text body section of e-mails  102  from 50 to 65, since 65 is the average risk value of the text body sections for which the reviewer  104  provides user input  108  to disclose. 
   In the second example, assume all information from the first example applies. Further assume that the original risk value threshold for the text body section of e-mails  102  was based on an average text body section risk value of 50 for 2500 disclosed e-mails  102 . In one embodiment, the adaptation module  212  may record a user profile  214  at the end of the month in question of 3200 disclosed e-mails  102 , with an average text body section risk value of 53.3. For the second example, the user customization module  216  may read the user profile  214 , and communicate with the risk management module  206  to move the risk value threshold for the text body section of e-mails  102  from 50 to 53.3, since 53.3 is the new average risk value of the text body sections which the reviewer  104  provides user input  108  to disclose. 
   In the third example, assume all information from the first example applies. In one embodiment, the adaptation module  212  may record a user profile  214  indicating that for text body sections, the risk value 77.5 sits exactly in the center between the average risk value for blocked sections versus the average risk value for disclosed sections. For the third example, the user customization module  216  may read the user profile  214 , and communicate with the risk management module  206  to move the risk value threshold for the text body section of e-mails  102  from 50 to 77.5, since this may be a value considered to get most of the text body section blocking versus disclosure decisions aligned with the likely user input  108 . 
   In the fourth example, assume that the reviewer  104  reviews 1000 e-mails  102  for a given month. Further assume that the adaptation module  212  records the risk values  204  of the text body section for only each e-mail  102  where the reviewer  104  provides user input  108  to change the text body section of an e-mail  102  from blocked to disclosed. For the month in question, assume that the reviewer  104  changed the text body section of 30 e-mails  102  from blocked to disclosed, and that the risk values  204  for the text body section of these e-mails  102  averaged 70. In one embodiment, the adaptation module  212  may record a user profile  214  indicating multiplier of 0.71. For the example, this value is derived from the assigned risk value threshold for text body sections of 50, and the average risk value for the text body section of e-mails  102  where the user input  108  indicated that the reviewer  104  disagreed with the outcome from the risk assessment module  202  and the risk management module  206 . For the fourth example, the user customization module  216  may read the user profile  214 , and communicate with the risk assessment module  202  such that the risk values  204  for the text body section for each e-mail  102  will be multiplied by 0.71 after other determinations are made. In the example, it can be seen that e-mails  102  which would have previously generated a 70 risk value  204  for the text body section would generate a risk value  204  of 50 after adjustments based on the user profile  214 . 
   Other manipulations of the adaptation module  212 , the user profile  214 , and the user customization module  216  are possible based on the level of skill of one in the art and the examples presented here. All of these are contemplated within the scope of the present invention. 
     FIG. 3  is a schematic block diagram depicting one embodiment of an e-mail screening tool  112  in accordance with the present invention. The e-mail screening tool  112  may comprise an administrator rules module  306 . The administrator rules module  306  may be configured to read administrator rules data  308 , and to communicate  310  the administrator rules data  308  to the risk assessment module  202  and the risk management module  206 . 
   In one embodiment, the risk management module  206  is further configured to modify the blocked sections of the incoming e-mail  102  based on the administrator rules data  308 . For example, the administrator rules data  308  may contain a rule to block all e-mail  102  sections that contain words of a racially offensive nature. Certain administrator rules may override existing risk values  204  and/or risk value thresholds for certain sections. In the example, regardless of the outcome of the risk values  204  and risk value thresholds, sections of the e-mail  102  which contain words of a racially offensive nature will be blocked. In another example, the administrator rules data  308  may contain a rule to reduce the risk value threshold for sections of an e-mail  102  containing a certain list of words by fifty-percent. In the example, any sections of the e-mail  102  containing a word on the administrator rule list will be blocked more readily than other words which generate a similar risk value  204 . In another example, the administrator rules data  306  may contain a rule to always disclose a certain set of text if it exists—for example a legal disclaimer—regardless of the determinations of the risk assessment module  202  and the risk management module  206 . 
   The administrator rules module  306  may be configured to apply rules in a permissive or non-permissive fashion. In one example, if the administrator rules module  306  applied a rule in a non-permissive fashion, then an e-mail  102  section blocked due to the rule may not be disclosed even if the risk values  204 , user input  108 , or user profile  214  might otherwise indicate that the blocked section should be disclosed. One of skill in the art will immediately appreciate the power of the administrator rules module  306 , and the various iterations of permissive and non-permissive rules, communications with the risk management module  206 , and communications with the risk assessment module that are possible. The administrator rules module  306  is particularly useful for implementing company policies for security or workplace environment, while providing reviewers  104  with the maximum flexibility otherwise provided by the present invention. 
   The e-mail screening tool  112  may further comprise a user preferences module  302  configured to read user preferences data  304  and modify the blocked sections of the e-mail  102  based on the user preferences data  304 . For example, the user preferences data  304  may contain a user preference to always show embedded images regardless of the determinations of the risk assessment module  202  and the risk management module  206 . In another example, the user preferences data  304  may contain a list of words, and a multiplier for each word, and the user preferences module  302  may be configured to communicate with either the risk assessment module  202  to modify the risk values  204  according to the multipliers in the user preferences data  304 , or with the risk management module  206  to modify the risk value threshold according to the multipliers in the user preferences data  304 . 
     FIG. 4A  illustrates one embodiment of a risk value  408  assigned to each section of an incoming e-mail in accordance with the present invention.  FIG. 4A  further illustrates a risk assessment module  202  configured to determine a set of constituent risk values  406  to each section  404  of an incoming e-mail message. For purposes of the illustration, the e-mail  102  contains offensive language which rates a 25 in the subject line, offensive language which rates a 65 in the text body, and offensive language which rates a  120  in the attachment name. The offensive language in each section may be the same language or not, since the algorithm which determines the constituent risk value does not need to assign the same value to each section for the same language. 
   For example, offensive language in the name of an attachment may be deemed especially risky in one embodiment of the present invention because a malicious file may be more risky than merely bad language. In another example, offensive language in the subject line may generate a lower risk value such that the overall embodiment will favor showing subject lines to give the reviewer  104  a little information to work with when determining whether an e-mail  102  should be eliminated. The determinations of risk values based on the section and the risky material are within the skill of one in the art, and depend upon the goals of the practitioner of the present invention. 
   The risk assessment module  202  in  FIG. 4A  determines the set of constituent risk values  406  for each section  404  of the e-mail  102  based upon a set of risk categories  402 . In one embodiment, the risk categories  402  may include offensive language, sales language, executable code, a picture or image, and the sender of the e-mail  102 . In the illustrated embodiment  408 , the risk value for each section  408  is determined from the maximum of the set of constituent risk values  406  for the section  404  in question. For example, for the attachment section, the constituent risk values  406  are (120, 0, 0, 90, 10) and the section risk value  408  for the attachment section is assigned to be  120 , or the maximum of the constituent risk values  406 . As discussed above in relation to the risk assessment module  202  in  FIG. 2 , other functions using the constituent risk values  406  may be used to assign the section risk values  408 . 
     FIG. 4B  illustrates one embodiment of a GUI slider  412  in accordance with the present invention. In one embodiment, the reviewer  104  can drag the pointer  414  to a desired location on the slider  412  to set a desired risk value threshold. The slider  412  may further comprise a risk value scale  410 . In the illustration, the pointer  414  is at a position on the risk value scale  410  indicating a risk value threshold of approximately 75. 
   If the slider  412  were associated with the section risk values  408  of  FIG. 4A , the risk management module  206  may display the subject line and text body sections of the e-mail  102 , while blocking the attachment section. In the example of  FIG. 4A , the e-mail  102  does not contain embedded code or an embedded image, so there is nothing to block. In a further example, if the reviewer  104  clicks on the slider  412 , or drags the pointer  414  to select a risk value threshold of 50, the risk management module  206  may display the section subject line, while blocking the sections text body and attachment since these have a risk value  408  higher than the new risk value threshold of 50. In this example, the reviewer  104  would be shown only the subject line of the e-mail  102 . Likewise, if the reviewer  104  clicked on the slider  412  to select a risk value threshold of 150, the risk management module  206  may show all sections of the e-mail  102  since all of the section risk values  408  are below the risk value threshold of 150. 
   The slider  412  may be in the same or a separate window from window displaying the e-mail  102 . The blocking and disclosing applied by the review interface  210  to sections of the e-mail  102  based on the user input  108  to the slider  412  may be displayed dynamically, or the reviewer  104  may review the settings before applying them. Further, the slider  412  may be associated with multiple selected e-mails  102  simultaneously. For example, the review interface  210  may selectively disclose subject lines for a batch of filtered emails. 
     FIG. 5  illustrates one embodiment of a plurality of GUI components  502  in accordance with the present invention. In one example, the plurality of GUI components  502  may contain a list of sections  504  of the e-mail  102  and a series of binary selections  506  corresponding to the list of sections  504 . In one embodiment, the series of binary selections  506  are pre-checked according to the determinations of the risk assessment module  202  and risk management module  206 . 
   In the illustration of  FIG. 5 , the series of binary selections  506  are consistent with the section risk values  408  of  FIG. 4A , and the slider  412  and pointer  414  settings of  FIG. 4B . In one embodiment, the reviewer  104  can check or uncheck members of the series of binary selections  506  to block or reveal the corresponding sections of selected e-mails  102 . Various embellishments of the presented GUI  502  are known in the art and contemplated within the scope of the present invention. Without limitation, these include graying out selections  506  which do not apply for a particular e-mail, giving the selections  506  a different appearance when multiple e-mails  102  are selected and the section risk values  408  do not give the same results for the initial display of the selections  506 , and a different appearance of selections  506  after the reviewer  104  has altered the initial display by setting selections  506  differently from the initial determinations made by the risk assessment module  202  and the risk management module  206 . 
   The schematic flow chart diagrams herein are generally set forth as logical flow chart diagrams. As such, the depicted order and labeled steps are indicative of one embodiment of the presented method. Other steps and methods may be conceived that are equivalent in function, logic, or effect to one or more steps, or portions thereof, of the illustrated method. Additionally, the format and symbols employed are provided to explain the logical steps of the method and are understood not to limit the scope of the method. Although various arrow types and line types may be employed in the flow chart diagrams, they are understood not to limit the scope of the corresponding method. Indeed, some arrows or other connectors may be used to indicate only the logical flow of the method. For instance, an arrow may indicate a waiting or monitoring period of unspecified duration between enumerated steps of the depicted method. Additionally, the order in which a particular method occurs may or may not strictly adhere to the order of the corresponding steps shown. 
     FIG. 6  is a schematic flow chart illustrating one embodiment of a method  600  to filter and selectively review e-mail  102  in accordance with the present invention. The method  600  may begin with the user customization module  216  reading  601  a user profile  214 . The method  600  may proceed with the administrator rules module  306  reading  602  administrator rules data  308 . Next, the user preferences module  302  may read  604  user preferences data  304 . 
   The risk assessment module  202  may then assign  606  risk values  204  to sections of an incoming e-mail  102  based on the user preferences data  304 , the administrator rules data  306 , and/or the user profile  214 . The risk management module  206  may then block  608  sections of the incoming e-mail  102 . Blocking a section may comprise setting an indicator that is used by the review interface  210  to determine which sections to disclose. The review interface  210  may then present  610  the selectively disclosed e-mail  208  to a reviewer  104 . 
   The review interface  210  may then selectively disclose  612  blocked sections of the incoming e-mail  102  to the reviewer  104  based on user input  108 . The method  600  may conclude with the adaptation module  212  generating and storing  614  an updated user profile  214  based on the risk values  204  and the user input  108 . 
     FIG. 7  is a schematic flow chart illustrating one embodiment of a method  700  to selectively review automatically filtered e-mail  102  in accordance with the present invention. The method  700  may begin with a technician  116  installing  702  an e-mail screening tool  112  on a mail server  110 . The technician  116  receives  704  risk criteria from a system administrator  114 , and enters the risk criteria as administrator rules data  308  on the mail server  110 . Risk criteria may include anything that may be deemed as relevant to the level of risk an e-mail  102  may present. For example, risk criteria may include the size or file type of an attachment, a set of key words, the presence of a picture, a list of hostile mail servers, and the like. 
   The method  700  may conclude with a reviewer  104  executing  708  the e-mail screening tool  112 . 
   The present invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential characteristics. The described embodiments are to be considered in all respects only as illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention is, therefore, indicated by the appended claims rather than by the foregoing description. All changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are to be embraced within their scope.