On Tuesday 24 Jan 2006 20:12, Bryan Phinney wrote: Not arguing with you Bryan - but commenting for the interest of anyone who isn't yet filtering at all. > > Well, I don't actively filter mailing list message via SpamAssassin. > I shuttle those straight through.
I did that in PopFile, at first. Until, that is, we got a couple of viruses onto the list. At that point I started to put every message through popfile, regardless of where it came from. It doesn't create the sort of delay that is often reported with SA. > However, I do attempt to intercept > some of the more obvious spam at the Mail Server level and that is > where using obvious triggers in the Subject lines causes the messages > to get dumped. > Interception at server level is always best where it is available. I never see any of the 'out-of-office' messages, and so on, because they are filtered out at server level. I like popfile because I can insert tagging into headers - which means that they are not seen by, for instance, customers - and then filter on those tags. Basically it's Bayesian filtering, but it must be very clever in the way that it scores. As I said, it knew the difference between the thread here and those messages that are always tagged as [devnull]. If anyone is interested, try popfile.sourceforge.net. The FAQ has a section that explains just why it's so good at its job. OK - advert over. Sorry to semi-hijack your thread, Bryan. Your point is still well made. Anne
pgpGIVUGP5Ir5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
