And they're misdirected. Spam is another name for UCE, unsolicited
commercial e-mail, which the thread in question definitely is not.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROT
Looks like someone's volunteering to demonstrate the effects of MAILSTORM...
-Original Message-
From: Troels Majlandt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 15:16
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SV: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics AGAIN MORE S
Looks like someone's volunteering to demonstrate the effects of MAILSTORM...
-Original Message-
From: Troels Majlandt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 15:16
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SV: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics AGAIN MORE S
You don't understand the definition of "spam"
so I suggest that you may also STFU.
--steve
> -Original Message-
> From: Troels Majlandt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 3:16 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: SV: Greg&
AGAIN MORE SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Greg Deckler
Sendt: 22. december 2003 20:57
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
John, you post some intelligent stuff I have to say. Yes,
MORE SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Greg Deckler
Sendt: 22. december 2003 20:48
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
If truth be told, I actually LOVE to starve children. It is one
these are worse than the debate.
-Original Message-
From: Troels Majlandt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 Dec 2003 14:23
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SV: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics SPAM
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[
]
Sent: 22 December 2003 19:31
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics SPAM
Yo tickturd... Was it really necessary for you to reply to all these
messages with SPAM? Just unsubscribe yourself... Or gripe to the admin's
like the rest of us.
The i
Yo tickturd... Was it really necessary for you to reply to all these
messages with SPAM? Just unsubscribe yourself... Or gripe to the admin's
like the rest of us.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Troels Majlandt
Sent: Monday, Decemb
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Martin Tuip [MVP]
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:51
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: Re: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
Does that make the shop unethical now for not considering any
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Chinnery, Paul
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:50
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
My sentiments exactly, Erik. I think your post says it all rega
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Erik Sojka
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:46
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the types of consu
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Shotton Jolyon
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:52
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Recall: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
I really must apologise for that moment of panic.
And apol
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Roger Seielstad
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:51
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
I don't know about the other MVP's, but I certainly
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Greg Deckler
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:53
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
Actually, I have had plenty of people step forward, privately and su
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Jeremy T. Slater
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:54
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
Of course they don't... And we'd prefer not to get i
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Ken Cornetet
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:56
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
Whoa! Guys! Stop!
UNBIASED
*That* is the crux of the problem with
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Tom Meunier
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:56
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
Argumentum ad ignorantiam doesn't work. Pretty common (and
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Tom Meunier
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:58
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
Nobody has ever proven that my bathtub isn't Cthulhu's
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Greg Deckler
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:58
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
The second scenario still presents the potential for a confli
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Shotton Jolyon
Sendt: 22. december 2003 20:13
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
Very true.
But surely the greater motivational force in these
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Roger Seielstad
Sendt: 22. december 2003 19:59
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> You can be offended all you want, it does not change the F
SPAM
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] På vegne af Greg Deckler
Sendt: 22. december 2003 20:05
Til: Exchange Discussions
Emne: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
As long as Inovis' HR department has no rules regarding acce
1:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: What is SPAM - Please comment
Oh wait, I get it. Since MVPs are unethical and SPAM is unethical, any
message coming from an MVP must be unethical.
Phew. I'm glad you pointed that out to the list.
Eric Fretz
L-3 Communications
ComCept Div
Spam is a synonym of the more technically correct term, unsolicited
commercial e-mail, or UCE. The name is pretty much self-defining.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Is your software scanning for the word "spam" in the message subject? :)
Or MVP?
-Original Message-
From: Scott Force [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 5:18 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: What is SPAM - Please comment
I'm just thankf
I'm just thankful that my anti-spam software has correctly identified and
properly dealt with these Spam related posts. The best 2k of my companies
money I've ever spent!
> Oh wait, I get it. Since MVPs are unethical and SPAM is unethical, any
> message coming from an MVP m
Oh wait, I get it. Since MVPs are unethical and SPAM is unethical, any
message coming from an MVP must be unethical.
Phew. I'm glad you pointed that out to the list.
Eric Fretz
L-3 Communications
ComCept Division
2800 Discovery Blvd.
Rockwall, TX 75032
tel: 972.772.750
Any email with MVP in the signature is spam.
-Original Message-
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 9:20 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: What is SPAM - Please comment
More ethical discussions?
-Original Message-
From
Spam.
I'd be cross if you sent that to me.
If you know me well enough to mention it and you think I'd be interested you
can tell me when we're down the pub, otherwise you can keep this and
anything else that isn't directly related to work to yourself.
I don't see wh
If you were to send it to a list like this then its SPAM.
If, on the other hand, its a mail to people internally surely you have
rules governing what can be sent over the network?
In the past the company I worked for allowed this, but as the numbers grew messages
sent out to ALL USERs (for
More ethical discussions?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 7:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: What is SPAM - Please comment
Dear All
I would be interested in any comments about the following ethical
problem
I'd say that's spam. There is a lot of argument about what exactly "spam" is, and I
would say this falls under the definition I use - unsolicited, commercial, bulk.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 15 Decem
That's definitely spam. No question about it. Unless your colleagues have
specifically asked for emails about telco offers, that is. And of course we
all know that they haven't.
Cheers,
Phil
-
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshi
lco-store.com
Thanks for your assistance.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
My question to you is whether if I were to send out a mail
ussions
Subject: RE: Sprint Email Services:anti-spam/anti-virus
They must have dropped their price since we looked at them. 5k per
year? They based our price on throughput.It came to 40k a year I
think.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Trend for email and desktop a/v and we've got a budget for spam but haven't
implemented it yet. That's why we met with Sprint.
Paul Chinnery
Network Administrator
Mem Med Ctr
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 0
What are you running for those services now if you don't mind me asking?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chinnery, Paul
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 3:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sprint Email Services:anti-spam
said hey that's not too bad; let somebody else handle that
burden.
Paul Chinnery
Network Administrator
Mem Med Ctr
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 3:20 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sprint Email Ser
PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sprint Email Services:anti-spam/anti-virus
They must have dropped their price since we looked at them. 5k per
year? They based our price on throughput.It came to 40k a year I
think.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE
I agree with you on that point, Ben. The spam part doesn't bother me too much but the
a/v does. It's a little troubling to give up that kind of control. And thank you for
pointing that out.
Paul Chinnery
Network Administrator
Mem Med Ctr
-Original Message-
From: Ben Winze
, November 07, 2003 3:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sprint Email Services:anti-spam/anti-virus
Here's the only problem I have with ANY service like that. It means
that I am relying on THEM to determine what is and is not spam, and I am
relying on THEM to scan my e-mail for viruse
: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sprint Email Services:anti-spam/anti-virus
Actually, the price didn't seem that out of line. For the whole shebang
(a/s, a/v, dis recovery; i.e. they hold all our mail until we get back
online), it came to around $5K per year. Heck, the way Trend's been
up
Here's the only problem I have with ANY service like that. It means
that I am relying on THEM to determine what is and is not spam, and I am
relying on THEM to scan my e-mail for viruses. I don't like doing
either - I would much rather be in control of both of those options. It
ain.
Paul Chinnery
Network Administrator
Mem Med Ctr
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 3:07 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Sprint Email Services:anti-spam/anti-virus
Get your wallet ready...
-Original Message
Discussions
Subject: Sprint Email Services:anti-spam/anti-virus
Has anybody on the list had any experience with Sprint's email service?
We had them in for a meeting today. They offer both an anti-spam and an
anti-virus service. MX records are changed to point to Sprint servers
where the ma
Get your wallet ready...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chinnery, Paul
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 3:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Sprint Email Services:anti-spam/anti-virus
Has anybody on the list had any experience with
Has anybody on the list had any experience with Sprint's email service? We had them
in for a meeting today. They offer both an anti-spam and an anti-virus service. MX
records are changed to point to Sprint servers where the mail is then subjected to
their a/s and a/v software.
Paul Chi
bject: RE: Off-topic changing SMTP port on Exchange for spam
filtering.
I am running it on W2K Advanced server (we are doing load balancing for
failover) although it will run nicely on W2K Server (what we initially
tested it on)
uses its own SMTP server .. can run on the machine that Exchange is
ect: RE: Off-topic changing SMTP port on Exchange for spam
filtering.
I was just taking a look at Xwall and it does in fact look pretty good.
Questions:
What operating system are you running it on?
Does it need a separate SMTP server to be running or does it provide its
own? If it needs another, w
Excuse me. Symantec said they weren't aware of any virus that can put dummy
addresses in the To and From fields? I find that hard to believe since the
Klez virus, among others, does this very thing and they are certainly aware
of that virus.
As for your original issue about the spam delet
Information Technology
Sabic Americas, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Wohlgemuth, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2003 10:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Off-topic changing SMTP port on Exchange for spam
filtering.
We have used Xwall for about a year
rprised if the spammers find
a way around it.
Bye
Ali
- Original Message -
From: "Jay Kulsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: Spam Clogging the IMC Queue -- Feigning Op
://www.cancer-treatment.net
- Original Message -
From: Jay Kulsh
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 9:17 PM
Subject: Spam Clogging the IMC Queue -- Feigning Open Relay
Hi folks,
We do not have open relay on our two Exchange servers (5.5 SP4) as tested by
various tools
Hi folks,
We do not have open relay on our two Exchange servers (5.5 SP4) as tested by
various tools. However in the queue of IMC, there are thousand of messages
that have outside domains in both source and destination addresses. The
addresses of originators are obviously computer generated with w
[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Off-topic changing SMTP port on Exchange for spam
filtering.
Let us all know what you think of Xwall if you get it running. I
looked at their web page and it's only $350 per server (any number of
users). If it works that sound very reasonable.
Tom
-
Thanks for all your help!
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Scott Weston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 9:02 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a budget
I would look into getting a new ISP. Not much you can do about other
people's sy
I would look into getting a new ISP. Not much you can do about other
people's systems if they are using dnsbl's.
-Original Message-
From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 7:38 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a bud
Bad experiences with dns based blacklists is that we are frequently
refused to send mails because our ISP appears on a number of blacklists.
-Original Message-
From: Erik Renberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: vrijdag 31 oktober 2003 14:35
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM
Hi,
I'm using a small free Exchange EventSink program called ORFilter.
http://martijnjongen.com/eng/orfilter/default.htm
ORFilter only checks the senders IP-adress against DNS-based blacklists
but that seems to get rid of most of the spam for us and it's
free...
The softw
e.
-Wayne
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
> Plahtinsky
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:22 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: SPAM filtering on a budget
>
> Hello list,
> I know SPAM filtering products
I restrict all kinds of mail attachments - HTML, .exe, .vbs., .vcf...all
kinds of things. I only let about five attachment types through at all.
I get a lot of complaints about it, but there's usually a workaround, and
our incidence of email-borne viruses has decreased dramatically.
Geni
__
Hi All,
We have experienced a vast increase in the amount of spam our employees have
been getting (in the region of 3-400% increase) over the last 6 months.
Prior to this, our MailSweeper was coping quite well with the problem, but
is having significant problems with HTML based email ( the ones
.
> -Original Message-
> From: Weathersby, Bryce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 30 October 2003 16:41
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a budget
>
>
> We are also using GFI MailEssentials 9. I have so far only activated
> black/whit
We are also using GFI MailEssentials 9. I have so far only activated
black/whitelisting and already have a constant 20-30% blockage of spam. Next
week I will enable the Bayesian filter next week. I highly recommend the GFI
Products...
Bryce Weathersby
Network Specialist I
Lamar Institute of
does take a bit
of work to build up the keyword list but seems pretty good to me, although I
don't know how much spam is getting passed the filter. False-positives are
less than 1% (and are mainly people sending remote images which is not
something we encouraged even if the message is inn
7635 5378, Fax: 44 (0)24 7635 8378
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: Alverson, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 30 October 2003 14:53
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Off-topic changing SMTP port on Ex
esday, October 29, 2003 10:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Off-topic changing SMTP port on Exchange for spam filtering.
Exchange 5.5
Sorry if this came through twice. Had to change the text type and re-send.
This is a little off-topic. We are about to deploy XWall for Exchange on
our
: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Off-topic changing SMTP port on Exchange for spam filtering.
POP, if I'm not mistaken, uses port 110.
Users mail could potentially get marked as spam I would think as they will
be sending through the smtp connector. Someone please correct me if I'm
POP, if I'm not mistaken, uses port 110.
Users mail could potentially get marked as spam I would think as they will
be sending through the smtp connector. Someone please correct me if I'm
wrong.
-K-
-Original Message-
From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (pfeffepe) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC
: Off-topic changing SMTP port on Exchange for spam filtering.
Exchange 5.5
Sorry if this came through twice. Had to change the text type and re-send.
This is a little off-topic. We are about to deploy XWall for Exchange on
our front end IMC relays. One of the requirements is that we change
Exchange 5.5
Sorry if this came through twice. Had to change the text type and re-send.
This is a little off-topic. We are about to deploy XWall for Exchange on
our front end IMC relays. One of the requirements is that we change the
smtp port for Exchange on the IMC's to use 24 since XWall w
There are win32 versions of spam assassin as well.
-- Rev. Kevinm WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Boyd, Nathan
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:43 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a
My advice would be to find someone who does know Linux (a student, maybe?)
and have them assist you in setting up a Linux/SpamAssassin box. There are
many, many guides available on the Internet to do this sort of thing.
___
If you are a pure Micr
lf Of Matt
Plahtinsky
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 10:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SPAM filtering on a budget
Hello list,
I know SPAM filtering products have been covered in great detail but I'm
having problems finding a good gateway SPAM filtering product that's not
going to co
22
To: Exchange Discussions
Hello list,
I know SPAM filtering products have been covered in great detail but I'm
having problems finding a good gateway SPAM filtering product that's not
going to cost me a lot of money. I have a small organization of about 100
users. The products that I
I had a budget to work with, did all kinds of research until I found out we
had the Enterprise License for SAV products... This meant that I was already
licensed for SAV for SMTP Gateways, which does SPAM, Attachaments, virus
scanning, subject blocking and DNSBL's too. My point being that
I hear IMGate is really good.
Sincerely,
Andrey Fyodorov
Systems Engineer
Messaging and Collaboration
Spherion
-Original Message-
From: Matt Plahtinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SPAM filtering on a budget
our DMZ, but I stopped using it for spam filtering as I found
keywords and RBLs to be a little too "black and white" (though to stress
again, I've not really tried its bayes filtering).
I currently use spamassassin, and I don't think I can over-emphasize just
how good it is cons
The ones at the top right = ]
-- Rev. Kevinm WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Woodruff,
Michael
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 9:19 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a budget
Well, we have
Well, we have had 3 of the products listed and its pretty accurate for
those.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevinm[MVP]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 12:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a budget
Those
: RE: SPAM filtering on a budget
http://www.nwfusion.com/reviews/2003/0915spam.html
Here is how well they work in production. Not sure about pricing
though, call em.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Plahtinsky
Sent: Tuesday
::pats MailFrontier box::
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 9:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a budget
http://www.nwfusion.com/reviews/2003/0915spam.html
Here is how well they work in
Discussions
Subject: SPAM filtering on a budget
Hello list,
I know SPAM filtering products have been covered in great detail but I'm
having problems finding a good gateway SPAM filtering product that's not
going to cost me a lot of money. I have a small organization of about
100 u
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, at 11:21am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> My problem with SpamAssassin is that I don't know the first thing about
> Linux so that's out of the question.
"Running Linux" - $32
"Linux Administration Handbook" - $45
Getting an ant
nal Message-
From: Matt Plahtinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SPAM filtering on a budget
Hello list,
I know SPAM filtering products have been covered in great detail but I'm
having problems finding a good gatewa
OTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:22 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: SPAM filtering on a budget
>
> Hello list,
> I know SPAM filtering products have been covered in great
> detail but I'm having problems finding a good gateway SPAM
> filtering produ
:39 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SPAM filtering on a budget
We've been using Spamassassin for several months now. For being free it
really does help out. We haven't updated to the latest version and I'm sure
that has limited its effectiveness. It really isn't h
web.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Plahtinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 8:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SPAM filtering on a budget
Hello list,
I know SPAM filtering products have been covered in great detail but I'm
having problems fi
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Matt
> Plahtinsky
> Sent: 28 October 2003 16:22
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: SPAM filtering on a budget
>
>
> Hello list,
> I know SPAM filtering products have been covered in great
> detail but I'm
> having problems findi
Hello list,
I know SPAM filtering products have been covered in great detail but I'm
having problems finding a good gateway SPAM filtering product that's not
going to cost me a lot of money. I have a small organization of about
100 users. The products that I have found that are reasona
AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: [SPAM-FILT] - RE: NDR Question - Number of numbers in MIME From
exceeds maximum threshold
Make a distribution list that goes nowhere and put those email addresses
that you are getting spammed with there. Acts as a blackhole, eating up
junk and never gives
!
http://secondlife.com/ss/?u=b4ebbfdd6af98a027fa7e89a86c55a68
-Original Message-
From: Gagrani, Kishore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: [SPAM-FILT] - RE: NDR Question - Number of numbers in MIME
>From exce
those mails (as we already do now) in a separate exchange
mailbox.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 12:40 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: [SPAM-FILT] - RE: NDR Question - Number of numbers in MIME From exceeds
ma
If it helps, we use Postini. Not too expensive while fighting off
viruses and spam. It's work a look.
Thanks
Russell
-Original Message-
From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 9:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: how does everyone
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 10:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: how does everyone fight this spam?
I am running a trial version of GFI's MailEssencials and MailSecurity on
Exchange 5.5.
Out of five different Corporate Email security programs I've tes
I am running a trial version of GFI's MailEssencials and MailSecurity on
Exchange 5.5.
Out of five different Corporate Email security programs I've tested, GFI's
products have been the most successful. In addition, there prices are very
reasonable.
See: http://www.gfi.com/
I also appreciate
GFI ME8
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 4:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Spam: False Positives
What are you using as your spam filter app?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
We use MMS and I have yet to get any of these spam.
Anthony L. Sollars
Technology Consultant
Information Technology Division, PACCAR Inc.
480 Houser Way North, Renton Wa., 98055
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
( 425.254.4845
) 425.681.4190
2 425.793.6000
-Original Message-
From: Neil Doody
What are you using as your spam filter app?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hansen, Eric
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 2:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Spam: False Positives
I'm curious how people on the list are addres
1 - 100 of 663 matches
Mail list logo
