Group: Forum Members
As a general suggestion, when making enhancement requests, I've found it's helpful to give some background about your use case that's driving the request. As you can see on this forum, there are lots of enhancement requests that get submitted, and Macrium doesn't have unlimited engineering resources, so it can be helpful to make a case for why your request in particular should be considered that goes beyond, "I'm one person who wants this." And sometimes providing some background about what you're trying to achieve allows others to suggest solutions that can be achieved today, without waiting on Macrium to (potentially) give you what you originally asked for.
But this particular request would have to be implemented carefully to avoid creating some significant security holes. For example, if the whitelist was just a registry item, then malware could potentially whitelist itself. And if the whitelist was just based on a file path, then malware could replace the actual file at that path with a malicious file of the same name and at the same path to gain "whitelist" status by virtue of that entry. A safe whitelist implementation would have to maintain "fingerprint" data about the actual whitelisted application, although that can pose its own challenges if you ever update that application, which of course alters the application file from its state when you originally whitelisted it -- and distinguishing benign application updates from malicious modifications can be tricky.
I remember another post of yours recently where you said that switching from XCopy to Robocopy resolved the issue you reported. What are you trying to do now that you can't seem to achieve without this user-customizable trusted application list?