‘Internet users are going to be flooded in spam.’
-
New spammer tool foils filters[^] ...as if we don't get enough right now :mad: Steve
-
New spammer tool foils filters[^] ...as if we don't get enough right now :mad: Steve
I think this is why Bayesian filters are a must if you want to do anything about spam blocking. Black/whitelists are ineffective anyways. I love my SpamBayes plugin and my Mom can't stop saying how much she loves ThunderBird's built-in bayesian filter (although she doesn't use those words exactly. I just told her it was really good at filtering spam. ;) )
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
-
New spammer tool foils filters[^] ...as if we don't get enough right now :mad: Steve
before it's not 99% spam, we don't have a critical mass to switch to a secure e-mail protocol. The quesiton is - which?
I never really know a killer from a savior
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
New spammer tool foils filters[^] ...as if we don't get enough right now :mad: Steve
-
I think this is why Bayesian filters are a must if you want to do anything about spam blocking. Black/whitelists are ineffective anyways. I love my SpamBayes plugin and my Mom can't stop saying how much she loves ThunderBird's built-in bayesian filter (although she doesn't use those words exactly. I just told her it was really good at filtering spam. ;) )
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
I like Thunderbird, but I do find that it doesn't get rid of that much spam. In my case it probably gets rid of 70%. Is that good? I was expecting it to be higher.
-
I think this is why Bayesian filters are a must if you want to do anything about spam blocking. Black/whitelists are ineffective anyways. I love my SpamBayes plugin and my Mom can't stop saying how much she loves ThunderBird's built-in bayesian filter (although she doesn't use those words exactly. I just told her it was really good at filtering spam. ;) )
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
David Stone wrote: I love my SpamBayes I was about to suggest it when I read your post :) I couldn't agree more... Yes, even I am blogging now!
-
before it's not 99% spam, we don't have a critical mass to switch to a secure e-mail protocol. The quesiton is - which?
I never really know a killer from a savior
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenI think Sender Policy Framework[^] looks quite promising actually. AOL, Hotmail and Google's GMail are all using it already. Microsoft have turned on SPF for msn.com and microsoft.com. It's enabled on earthlink.net. I'm sure there are many others. When I say 'turned on', I mean that those domains have put SPF records in DNS. This indicates which servers are actually entitled to send mail from those domains. Spam filters can use this as additional information to decide whether the mail is coming from an authorized user and server. This has an extra implication - your mail will be less trusted if you send it from somewhere other than your home server. To this end RFC 2476[^] specifies a new port, 587, for authenticated-only SMTP traffic for users 'away from home' to use to submit mail. Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
What, do valid emails have to be in the single-digit percentages now before it can be considered a flood? :wtf:
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
Indeed! Over 90% of the email I receive is spam, and that's after SpamBayes has already filtered it.:omg: "If it's Snowbird season, why can't we shoot them?" - Overheard in a bar in Bullhead City
-
Indeed! Over 90% of the email I receive is spam, and that's after SpamBayes has already filtered it.:omg: "If it's Snowbird season, why can't we shoot them?" - Overheard in a bar in Bullhead City
"Since the Can Spam measure took effect in January 2004, unsolicited junk e-mail on the Internet has come to total perhaps 80 percent or more of all e-mail sent, up from 50 percent to 60 percent of all e-mail before the law went into effect"[^] :sigh::sigh::sigh: Breaking spammers' hands and legs with iron bars on public places, that's the solution.
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
-
"Since the Can Spam measure took effect in January 2004, unsolicited junk e-mail on the Internet has come to total perhaps 80 percent or more of all e-mail sent, up from 50 percent to 60 percent of all e-mail before the law went into effect"[^] :sigh::sigh::sigh: Breaking spammers' hands and legs with iron bars on public places, that's the solution.
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
K(arl) wrote: Breaking spammers' hands and legs with iron bars on public places Got my vote!:-D "If it's Snowbird season, why can't we shoot them?" - Overheard in a bar in Bullhead City
-
K(arl) wrote: Breaking spammers' hands and legs with iron bars on public places Got my vote!:-D "If it's Snowbird season, why can't we shoot them?" - Overheard in a bar in Bullhead City
Let's begin the hunt then! Spammers season!:-D
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
-
K(arl) wrote: Breaking spammers' hands and legs with iron bars on public places Got my vote!:-D "If it's Snowbird season, why can't we shoot them?" - Overheard in a bar in Bullhead City
Hehe...I knew you were going to chime in on this one Rog. ;) I can see it now, Roger Wright, Chief Spam Stopper steps up to the block. The convicted spammer tries desperately to wriggle himself free of the cuffs keeping him in place. The 'Stopper stares at him though the veil with icy eyes, muttering the words that the spammer will remember forever: "For the last time, I don't need Viagra!" The cold iron bar raised above his head, Wright pauses for a second and then, with the fury of a million frustrated e-mail users, brings the weight of judgement down upon the poor wretch's hands, ending his spamming spree forever... Okay, so maybe I'll stick with my applied math degree rather than a Lit degree. :rolleyes:
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
-
"Since the Can Spam measure took effect in January 2004, unsolicited junk e-mail on the Internet has come to total perhaps 80 percent or more of all e-mail sent, up from 50 percent to 60 percent of all e-mail before the law went into effect"[^] :sigh::sigh::sigh: Breaking spammers' hands and legs with iron bars on public places, that's the solution.
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
Beheading. Permanent fix. Anger is the most impotent of passions. It effects nothing it goes about, and hurts the one who is possessed by it more than the one against whom it is directed. Carl Sandburg
-
Indeed! Over 90% of the email I receive is spam, and that's after SpamBayes has already filtered it.:omg: "If it's Snowbird season, why can't we shoot them?" - Overheard in a bar in Bullhead City
-
Beheading. Permanent fix. Anger is the most impotent of passions. It effects nothing it goes about, and hurts the one who is possessed by it more than the one against whom it is directed. Carl Sandburg
Not cruel enough. People need to remember, and they will when they'll see an ex-spammer crawling. Let's add a "SPAMMER" tatoo on the face, just to be sure.
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
-
I think Sender Policy Framework[^] looks quite promising actually. AOL, Hotmail and Google's GMail are all using it already. Microsoft have turned on SPF for msn.com and microsoft.com. It's enabled on earthlink.net. I'm sure there are many others. When I say 'turned on', I mean that those domains have put SPF records in DNS. This indicates which servers are actually entitled to send mail from those domains. Spam filters can use this as additional information to decide whether the mail is coming from an authorized user and server. This has an extra implication - your mail will be less trusted if you send it from somewhere other than your home server. To this end RFC 2476[^] specifies a new port, 587, for authenticated-only SMTP traffic for users 'away from home' to use to submit mail. Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
Mike Dimmick wrote: I think Sender Policy Framework[^] looks quite promising actually. I'm not sure that "big-brothering" emails might be an accurate solution. According to this article[^], "One useful resource provided by the Spamhaus Project is its register of known spam operations, according to which a mere 200 known spamming operations are responsible for 90 per cent of the spam received in North America and Europe" Let's create an adequate law condemning spam in the most connected countries (as there's already in some countries), let's find these 200 people, make examples with them, and let see if spam is still a problem. I fear many will use fight against spam as a cover for their agenda. Yes, I'm paranoid :-D
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
-
Mike Dimmick wrote: I think Sender Policy Framework[^] looks quite promising actually. I'm not sure that "big-brothering" emails might be an accurate solution. According to this article[^], "One useful resource provided by the Spamhaus Project is its register of known spam operations, according to which a mere 200 known spamming operations are responsible for 90 per cent of the spam received in North America and Europe" Let's create an adequate law condemning spam in the most connected countries (as there's already in some countries), let's find these 200 people, make examples with them, and let see if spam is still a problem. I fear many will use fight against spam as a cover for their agenda. Yes, I'm paranoid :-D
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
K(arl) wrote: make examples with them La légion étrangère? :cool:
I never really know a killer from a savior
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
I like Thunderbird, but I do find that it doesn't get rid of that much spam. In my case it probably gets rid of 70%. Is that good? I was expecting it to be higher.
That's odd. My mom hardly ever complains about spam anymore. Maybe I'll ask her how much it actually gets rid of. One thing that you could do is set up the standalone SpamBayes filter. In addition to making a plugin for Outlook, the SpamBayes team also makes an app that watches your POP3 traffic and can scan your mail when it comes in that way. You may want to try that if you find the built-in filter to be ineffective.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
-
K(arl) wrote: make examples with them La légion étrangère? :cool:
I never really know a killer from a savior
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenMaybe. Gut them with a dull knife, and feed them their own steaming entrails... I hate spammers.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
"Since the Can Spam measure took effect in January 2004, unsolicited junk e-mail on the Internet has come to total perhaps 80 percent or more of all e-mail sent, up from 50 percent to 60 percent of all e-mail before the law went into effect"[^] :sigh::sigh::sigh: Breaking spammers' hands and legs with iron bars on public places, that's the solution.
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links