How Do You Fight Spam?
from the how-good-are-your-filters? dept
While Congress wrestles with the latest plan for anti-spam legislation, plenty of people are doing their best to get around the spam problem themselves, by using various filtering technologies. Here's an article detailing the methods that many people use - suggesting that spam filtering is pretty effective. I know it's done wonders for me, though, it is still a pain. I use three levels of spam filtering at this point. SpamCop and SpamAssassin on the server side catches the vast majority of spam - so that I don't even need to download it. On the client side, I use PopFile, which does a good job of sorting out the few spam messages that do go through. So, these days, I get about 200 to 250 spam messages a day, with about 10 to 15 getting through the server, and one or two making it into my inbox. On the whole, that's pretty manageable. Of course, the amount of spam has increased tremendously in the past few months (it had held steady at 100 messages/day for a while) - and I do wonder how well the filters will hold up under greater loads. Still, it's interesting to see what other solutions people have put together to push away the spam.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
No Subject Given by Kevin on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 2:26pm
How do you keep yourself assured that your filters are not canning legitimate inbound email?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given by Mike on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 2:40pm
I actually review them. None of those solutions trashes the email completely, but by setting it all aside, I can scan them all pretty quickly and (hopefully) spot any false positives.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given by LittleW0lf on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 3:44pm
None of those solutions trashes the email completely, but by setting it all aside, I can scan them all pretty quickly and (hopefully) spot any false positives.
And how many false positives do you see? I may get one a week, or even one a month. Seems like a system to forward the headers to the user may be better than having the administrator review them...I haven't seen any system that does this (and is open source.) May have to build one...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given by Mike on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 3:54pm
Not too many... I'd say maybe one or two a month. However, last night, I went through a week's worth of spam (nearly 2,000) and *luckily* caught two messages (the only two false positives) from a friend who is coming to visit this weekend, and was probably getting annoyed that I hadn't responded to any of her emails arranging plans.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given by LittleW0lf on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 4:14pm
However, last night, I went through a week's worth of spam (nearly 2,000) and *luckily* caught two messages (the only two false positives) from a friend who is coming to visit this weekend
Good catch...
I have noticed that SPAM Assassin tends to not like Hotmail and some of the other "Freemail" services. Manditory capital punishment of career SPAMmers should eleviate this problem...if only I could dream for a moment.
Anyone know of an open source SPAM program which sends summaries of SPAM to users instead of the whole email? I am looking for a program like SPAM Assassin which captures SPAM and holds it, sending a summary of the suspected SPAM to the user and asks them to reply if they think it is a real email that should be sent through. Right now, I sort all SPAM into an email account, and then look through the SPAM occasionally to see if it may have been misidentified. If I see any, I forward it on to the intended recipient, but I'd much rather not have to subject myself to violating my user's privacy, and would like to give them the opportunity to review their own SPAM instead. My users would do it, but only if the headers/summaries were sent.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Check Them All Anyway by Beck on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 6:54pm
It seems that even with spam filtering you still end up scanning through all of the spam to make sure that there are no false positives.
I purchased a domain a couple of years ago to use for personal email but I haven't started using it because I'm afraid my personal address will become known by spammers, and once they have it you're done.
I try to use disposable addresses and keep a good address for personal correspondence, but all it takes is one friend to do the "email to a friend" feature on the wrong web site and you're done.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Check Them All Anyway by Mike on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 6:56pm
There's a *huge* difference between scanning a folder full of spam once a week and sorting it out of your inbox in real time.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Fighting Spam by Beck on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 7:01pm
I have read that there are a relatively small number of spammers who are responsible for the majority of all spam. Maybe the fight against spam needs to become more literal. if the CIA or some branch of the Special Forces went after these spammers I think the problem could "go away" pretty quickly. I think maybe three or four well publicized "operations" would convince the surviving spam merchants to find a new vocation.
Any objections? ...Didn't think so.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Cloudmark is the Undisputed Champion if Spam Fight by Father Dan on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 9:02pm
check out www.cloudmark.com - read this techdirt post this morning and am just getting around to replying right now, funny - but Cloudmark is being interviewed on TechTV as I write this and TechTV said (sic) "You have the best and most unique way of working . . . ." -- Try Cloudmark, you'll love it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Cloudmark is the Undisputed Champion if Spam F by Mike on Oct 30th, 2003 @ 9:28pm
Really? The comparison tests I've seen with Cloudmark have shown that they were pretty bad in stopping spam.
Also, *bzzt* it's (a) client side and (b) only for Microsoft products. My spam filters should be server side, and I don't use an MS client, so I'm outta luck.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment