internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
- From: Steven Champeon <schampeo AT hesketh.com>
- To: "'Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/'" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:42:07 -0500
on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 10:04:09AM -0500, Shea Tisdale wrote:
> That looks like an interesting product Kurt. Thanks for posting it.
I was an early adopter of Vipul's Razor - the service on which the
Cloudmark product is based. I funnelled some fifty thousand or so spam
messages through razor-report before I finally gave up in despair some
months ago - they simply couldn't keep their reporting servers up. I'm
glad someone finds the for-pay Windows product useful, but IME people
who actually feed the hash databases are abandoning Razor, so the future
of the product is questionable. I found it only gave us about 40% hit
rate on spam, letting 60% through, whereas blocking on other factors
blocks 90-95% or more. Filtering on content is always iffy.
> I've also watching early implementations of Challenged Response. I
> think that could also be very helpful in eliminating spam.
Yuck. C/R, for anyone who runs a mailing list, is a bane. I unsub
anyone using C/R whose systems are too stupid to know when they're
receiving mail sent via a legit mailing list. I sincerely hope it
doesn't come into wider use, or that if it does, it gets a hell of a
lot better than the systems I've seen...
--
hesketh.com/inc. v: (919) 834-2552 f: (919) 834-2554 w: http://hesketh.com
Book publishing is second only to furniture delivery in slowness. -b. schneier
-
Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS
, (continued)
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Steven Champeon, 11/18/2003
- [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, James Manning, 11/18/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] [Law/Econ] SPAM the SPAMMERS, Alan MacHett, 11/19/2003
- RE: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Michael D. Thomas, 11/18/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Thomas Beckett, 11/18/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Tanner Lovelace, 11/19/2003
- RE: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Kurt Schlatzer, 11/19/2003
- [internetworkers] Estimating the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow, Rowland Smith, 11/19/2003
- Re: [internetworkers][kook!] Estimating the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow, Sil Greene, 11/19/2003
- RE: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Shea Tisdale, 11/19/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Steven Champeon, 11/19/2003
- RE: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Shea Tisdale, 11/19/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Steven Champeon, 11/19/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, James Manning, 11/19/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Steven Champeon, 11/19/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Tanner Lovelace, 11/19/2003
- RE: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Michael D. Thomas, 11/19/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Steven Champeon, 11/20/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Tanner Lovelace, 11/20/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Steven Champeon, 11/20/2003
- Re: [internetworkers] Re: SPAM the SPAMMERS, Tanner Lovelace, 11/20/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.