internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
- From: Michael Czeiszperger <michael AT czeiszperger.org>
- To: Info AT mindbenderstudios.com, "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Cc:
- Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Spam Blocker Advice
- Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 09:56:38 -0400
On May 18, 2004, at 4:34 PM, MBS wrote:
Does anyone have any real world
experience with spam blockers that can reduce spam but not
too heavy handed?
By this I assume you don't want any false positives on spam identification?
I've looked at Mail Marshal which requires a min of 75
seats and Spam Cop which I believe is an open source
solution; or it could be a trojan horse.
I tried configuring spamassassin and found it to be overall less effective than spamcop, but I didn't spend much time tuning spamassassin. All of our public customer email addresses are now filtered through spamcop, and I only found 1 false positive during a testing period. It stops typically around 75 spam messages a day, letting through only one or two messages.
As I'm sure Steven Ch. can tell you there are lots of other ways to fight spam. Since my priorities are with developing and selling products, not infrastructure, I like the idea of outsourcing spam control.
___________________________________________________________________
michael at czeiszperger dot org
Chapel Hill, NC
-
[internetworkers] Spam Blocker Advice,
MBS, 05/18/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Spam Blocker Advice, Steven Champeon, 05/18/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Spam Blocker Advice, Michael Czeiszperger, 05/19/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.