Comments on: Let There Be… NO Spam!

By: Skip

Skip — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 08:17:21 +0000

BTW, 300 baud and 8-inch floppies? Sherry, the “baudy” lady from Racal-Milgo? Can you say CP/M? Z80′s in Apple II slots? A whole *huge* 64K? Donated some of that, 8″ FDD’s ‘n all, to a university effin computer museum. My life as museum material. Sigh.

By: Skip

Skip — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 07:59:50 +0000

After years of Outlook at work, too many years, I’ve capitulated and use it at home. It’s got all the tools, got all the managment. Finishing setting up myaccounts to forward to GMail for a repository/focal point, then POP3 from that down to my PC with Outlook. It flat works. Outlook’s updated frequently, and is well supported by 3rd parties. The overhead? Yeah, but the next MB upgrade will be to a dual AMD – you want the features, pay the price in hardware. Efficiency’s not a high priority among software vendors these days.

By: mike

mike — Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:32:53 +0000

Ill second the spam bayes. It takes about a week to get it going well and
I also narrowed down the range of what what might not be spam. It sits
between your email program and the actual server. Requires some clue but
you need not be a total geek to get it working.

Also, if you ever get a new email address – the hell with your friends. Make
it a random letter # combo. This will cut a lot of the dictionary based
spam attacks down.

As for comment spam, if you use Pivot, check out Pivot-Blacklist. Talk
about a life saver.

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 01 Feb 2005 05:33:21 +0000

In addition to having the same email address since years before modern informational hygene requirements were thought necessary, I’m also a former Usenet moderator, and I’m postmaster@, hostmaster@, webmaster@, support@, service@, abuse@, and root@ about 80 of my clients’ domains. In consequence, even after RBL filtering, my server accepts something in the neighborhood of 40,000 spams per day for me. I see maybe 5 or 6 show up in my actual mailbox on a bad day.

SpamAssassin. It’s The Way(tm).

By: Sigivald

Sigivald — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:49:18 +0000

I’ve been using Cloudmark SpamNet (now, er, “SafetyBar”, I think) for a while now.

It’s not free (thre’s a small monthly charge – I got in early so mine’s like $1.95 a month or something piddling like that), but by God it works, since there’s a zillion people using it and helping configure the spam recogniser system collaboratively.

By: Todd

Todd — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:56:34 +0000

Nice. The reason I don’t like Outlook though is because it is a resource hog. I’m sure it has many cool features, but it burdens my system when I’m travelling. For simple Spam protection, Gmail gets it right 98% of the time – just tosses all suspected Spam into my Spam file for review (if I want to)

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:57:01 +0000

I’ve been using SpamBayes for quite some time and it is an excellent filter. The description of Outlook Spam Filter looks very similar to SpamBayes. They’re both bayesian filters that plug into Outlook. A bonus with SpamBayes is that it’s free.

By: Allen

Allen — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 16:36:50 +0000

I’m not quite as popular as you are. I only get a few hundred a day and use Choice Mail as a filter. It has has a free version. For the real deal try http://www.projecthoneypot.org for a way to help rid us of email harvesters. By the way you did not respnd to my email for help.

By: Teresa

Teresa — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:01:06 +0000

Very oddly I get little or no spam – except on my old yahoo account which I rarely look at anymore. I know my boss does though and I will pass this along to him. Thanks for the review!