I double check my spam filters ...
Displaying poll results.17365 total votes.
I double check my spam filters ...
I just asked myself... what would John DeLorean do? -- Raoul Duke
I just asked myself... what would John DeLorean do? -- Raoul Duke
Missing option... (Score:5, Insightful)
No real need to check them. (Score:5, Insightful)
Been working well for a decade. The neat thing is that 90% of the stuff that needs to be rejected can be done without any spam analysis at all. I only call my spamassassin checks *AFTER* vetting things through MimeDefang. Why waste the CPU cycles? RBLs, Pretending to be from my domain, mail to system accounts, invalid HELO (not FQDN or IP address - single words are very popular with spammers/botnets), RFC1918 HELO addresses, etc. After that, they then go through my spamassassin process, which has been collecting bayes data for several years. The community provided spamassassin rules are kept up to date, and I have a Nagios process that also ensures they are up to date (check_sa-update on nagios exchange. Written by yours truly).
I'd put my system, based on MimeDefang, Spamassassin, clam, etc against barracuda any day. I bet I have a lot less false positives (0 the past year, 1 every couple of months while tuning at my last company), and use a whole lot less CPU by discarding obvious garbage that doesn't need to be processed by spamassassin.
The most recent thing is the "Hello" stuff from legitimate mail accounts. The spammers are using active exploits the past few years to slip through filters, but they still don't get in. I should relabel my spam folder to "Friends with compromised accounts" Everything else scores off the charts and is discarded.
Too Much Trust in Technology (Score:5, Insightful)
I check the Gmail spam folder daily - usually there are less than a dozen messages there - and about once a month find something that shouldn't have been blocked.
I would never put 100% trust in a spam filter.
Re:Technically speaking.... (Score:3, Insightful)
> Why would I...
There's so much wrong with that I don't know where to start.
Re:Technically speaking.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I am not the AC you replied to, but I have tried being friendly and letting people know that they sent to the wrong address.
No good deed goes unpunished. The responses tend to be abusive, threatening or both, blaming the recipient for both obtaining the mail, reading some of it, and the capital offense of implying that the sender might have made a mistake.
If they're stupid enough to send e-mail to the wrong address, the risk is that they're also stupid enough to think that you were the one who caused the problem.