I'm finding that use of the Outclass interface to POPfile is surprisingly effective at dealing with my spam problem (and I get a lot of it) - since training POPfile I haven't had a single spam message get into my inbox no false positives. Of course I could just be very, very lucky and with this post the email gods will punish me...
How does the effectiveness of Greylisting compare with what others are seeing with existing techniques (such as Bayesian filtering)? Is it a false positives problem, such as d
If people start adopting anti-spam technologies we would reduce the return spammers get from sending spam. Reduce this enough and the spamming business will no longer be profitable.
POPFile is great. I've also used SAProxy (http://saproxy.bloomba.com/) under windows and it works great too.
Again, the idea is not to eliminate all spam, but to reduce the return rate, and therefore the money made by spammers.
There is a "Let's replace SMTP to stop spammers!" meme floating around. I haven't seen a single example of a new SMTP protocol that will actually stop spamming - they only make it marginally harder. Replace SMTP and you've gone to a whole lot of effort, and the spammers will still find a way to spam.
People shouldn't dismiss client-side filtering on the grounds that spammers are still wasting our resources. That's a temporary situation! Right now most people don't have good client-side filt
How many of those who would install spam filtering software would ever, ever buy something based upon spam? So, the moral of the story is that we aren't hurting the spammers unless we would buy from them anyway.
Sorry, but your response is wrong and shows how uninformed you (and many other people) are on this subject.
You think spammers make money because you buy based on their email? Nope - this is not the case. There are lots of tricks spammers use to make money - try a google search on "how spammers make money" and do some research.
Just selecting a message that is in one of your email folders (even if you are just selecting in order to delete the message) can generate revenue for a spammer. Many of the image
"Well hello there Charlie Brown, you blockhead."
-- Lucy Van Pelt
Bayesian Filtering (Score:3, Interesting)
How does the effectiveness of Greylisting compare with what others are seeing with existing techniques (such as Bayesian filtering)? Is it a false positives problem, such as d
Re:Bayesian Filtering (Score:4, Insightful)
If people start adopting anti-spam technologies we would reduce the return spammers get from sending spam. Reduce this enough and the spamming business will no longer be profitable.
POPFile is great. I've also used SAProxy (http://saproxy.bloomba.com/) under windows and it works great too.
Again, the idea is not to eliminate all spam, but to reduce the return rate, and therefore the money made by spammers.
Re:Bayesian Filtering (Score:3)
Mod parent up!
There is a "Let's replace SMTP to stop spammers!" meme floating around. I haven't seen a single example of a new SMTP protocol that will actually stop spamming - they only make it marginally harder. Replace SMTP and you've gone to a whole lot of effort, and the spammers will still find a way to spam.
People shouldn't dismiss client-side filtering on the grounds that spammers are still wasting our resources. That's a temporary situation! Right now most people don't have good client-side filt
Re:Bayesian Filtering (Score:2)
How many of those who would install spam filtering software would ever, ever buy something based upon spam? So, the moral of the story is that we aren't hurting the spammers unless we would buy from them anyway.
Re:Bayesian Filtering (Score:1)