Jules Agee wrote:
I'm getting more complaints lately from users on my network about spam.
Investigating the complaints reveals they get between five or ten per
day on average. This is about what I expect in my own inbox, and I don't
mind because it's a lot better than it used to be.
But it seems like people have higher expectations these days, and I'm
wondering if I should consider alternatives to what I'm doing now.
Right now I'm using postgrey and spamassassin. According to my server
logs, internet MXs make about 1.5 million connections to our server per
week. 90% of those are blocked by greylisting, about 4% are tagged by
SpamAssassin, and the remaining 6% are delivered to users' inboxes
unchanged.
Are any of you getting better results with another solution?
-Jules
I use postfix w/ reject_rbl_client (spamcop & abuseat) followed by
amavisd (which calls clamav & spamassassin).
I re-train spamassassin's BAYES rules nightly using sa-learn for each
user (whom I create a spam IMAP folder into which they can drop anything
that sneaks by).
See http://conshell.net/wiki/index.php/SpamAssassin for a write-up.
5 junk messages a day is about the worst I see but they're almost always
forgivable i.e. very terse or vague type of messages or just not obvious.
This solution works well for me, it is not perfect but darn close. The
downside is it is complicated to set up. Once it is all working
though... sweet.
If I add anything else to this to this solution it would be postgrey.
HTH.
--
I hate racists.
Mark D. Foster <m...@foster.cc>
http://mark.foster.cc/ | http://conshell.net/
