We recently decided to go through our spamtraps (E-mail addresses designed 
to collect spam), to find out which spam tests were most effective at 
catching spam.  Given how much spam has increased lately (the daily volume 
of spam to our spamtraps has about doubled in the past 2 months), we felt 
this would be of interest.  The results are based on over 5,000 spams that 
were received, all in April, 2002.

The following is a list of tests that we run against the E-mails arriving 
at the spamtrap, and what percentage of the spam they caught (it will be 
easier to read if you use a fixed-width font):

WEIGHT10          96.99%
WEIGHT20          86.85%
SNIFFER           77.38%
SPAMCOP           70.73%
REVDNS            51.68%
NJABL             49.92%
SPAMHEADERS       47.95%
ORDB              39.71%
HEUR10            37.90%
FREEMAIL          30.14%
RSL               28.87%
MONKEYPROXIES     28.79%
NOABUSE           27.33%
DORKS             25.84%
ROUTING           25.73%
POSTFIXGATE       22.70%
OSRELAY           22.22%
BADHEADERS        22.20%
XBL               19.77%
DORKZTL           17.31%
DSBLALL           16.56%
OSPROXY           13.69%
OSSRC             13.69%
NOPOSTMASTER      13.21%
HEUR9             12.70%
DSN               11.03%
IPWHOIS            9.52%
SPAMHAUS           9.20%
HEUR8              7.95%
DSBL               7.79%
FABELSOURCES       7.21%
BADWHOIS           7.17%
DEWS               7.15%
BLITZEDSOCKS       6.62%
BLARSBL            6.38%
BLITZEDHTTP        4.30%
SUMMIT             4.17%
OSSOFT             3.41%
KITHRUP            2.32%
MAILFROM           2.08%
MONKEYFORMMAIL     1.11%
PIGS               0.93%
ABL                0.85%
NJABLDUL           0.64%
OSDUL              0.34%
DEVNULL            0.29%
BLITZEDWINGATE     0.27%
COMPU              0.05%


The WEIGHT10 and WEIGHT20 tests are just a weighting system that assigns a 
weight to each E-mail, based on the spam tests that fail, so they don't 
really count as spam tests by themselves.

The two best tests by far are SNIFFER ( http://www.sortmonster.com ) at 
77.38% and SPAMCOP ( http://www.spamcop.net ) at 70.73%.

The next three entries (REVDNS, NJABL, and SPAMHEADERS) all have fairly 
high false positives, which makes them a poor choice to block mail on 
(although they help a lot for the weighting, and can be used to mark spam 
with a standard "X-RBL-Warning:" header for example), with no other tests 
alone catching over 40% of the spam.

More information on most of the various spam tests shown above can be found 
at http://www.declude.com/junkmail/support/ip4r.htm .

                                                    -Scott
---
Declude: Anti-virus, Anti-spam and Anti-hijacking solutions for 
IMail.  http://www.declude.com

---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]


Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html 
to be removed from this list.

An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/

Please visit the Knowledge Base for answers to frequently asked
questions:  http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to