Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Roger Phillips: Monday, July 27, 2009, 7:05:25 PM, among other things, you wrote: L Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to L access the white list configuration. ... Did you start with 3.2.1.1 or did you upgrade from an earlier version? I upgraded, but thanx: I finally got to grab the lost dialog using alt+spacebar,move, it was way way out of the screen. So, I'm going to test the white list feature, finally. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Simon, On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 00:33:18 +0100 GMT (28/Jul/09, 6:33 AM +0700 GMT), Simon wrote: Hello ...snip long stuff... free? S Just so there is no unnecessary hostility poking through here, whatever S position you are defending I am not on the other side of it threatening it S in any way, so you may want to relax on the adversarial stuff. Great, thanks for making that clear. S And just in case it needs to be made clear, I am not an advocate of theft, S crime, stealing software, or any other such activities. Neither would I S suggest that people take want they want when they want it. And I haven't S proposed that everything in the world should be free for everyone, although S you seem to inferring that I have. For whatever reason you maybe just S misunderstanding, or maybe I am. It matters not, because I don't advocate a S 'free for all' anything...or slavery :-/ OK. This is clear now. :-) S My home PC has a mixture of commercial and freeware and Open Source software S on itif it isn't free or within my budget it doesn't get installed. This exactly was my point. We seem to be thinking the same way after all. S For example, I purchased TB! right back near the 'beginning' and S continue to pay for upgrades. I do the same for a number of other S pieces of software as well. But if all the other software I S currently use was commercial software then I would never be able to S afford to use much of anythingand this would severely limit S what I use the computer for. I see what you mean. There is some softeware on my computer for which I didn't pay the upgrade fee any more - and stick with the old version. S I purchased WinRAR when I had DOS and WFWG 3.11 and the licence I purchased S way back then has licensed me for all versions since that time. A number of S software authors use this model.Rarlab still exists, and release regular S updates. And without me paying, paying again, and paying again, and again... I have the same with Total Commander. However, when I purchased the new office computer for the new company a year ago, I bought new licences rather than moving the old ones. I could have, but I thought they are doing a good job. S Commercial software authors are just like everyone else, vying for a portion S of the pie, a slice of the limited and finite resources that people have S available to them. They are selling a product and hope to convince people S that it is worth paying our for...often over and over again. The simple fact S is that only a few will be able to make a decent living from this practice, S not the many...and those that believe that they deserve to make a living S just because they are creating something are misguided, and haven't worked S out that it is other people value their product, not them. If you get that S wrong, then you don't get paidand you'll need to look for another way to S make money. I agree with this. That is why it is important for software developers who make a living of it to produce software that people are willing to pay for. The competition is ever-improving, you have to keep step ahead. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.9 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions [now OT]
Hi On Monday 27 July 2009 at 9:59:48 AM, in mid:1703211512.20090727095...@privateofcourse.co.uk, Simon wrote: I have absolutely no argument there. I completely agree that 'a workman is worthy of his hire', to steal from an old religious book. People are criminally undervalued, vastly overworked, and grossly underpaid, that's how capitalism works. Only by a narrow model of capitalism driven solely by naked greed. What about the early capitalist philanthropists who provided homes and welfare for their employees? This is often no longer possible thanks to the reprehensible invention called a plc, where the profits are distributed among shareholders who do absolutely nothing to deserve having the wealth siphoned from the communities that created it into their fat, deep pockets. [...] I don't believe that it inevitably leads to nobody valuing what anybody does, rather it makes those with less money in their pockets fight much harder to get the services and 'things' cheaper, so that they can afford them. Which drives still more people to be paid far below the worth of their efforts and adds to the momentum of the downward spiral. I heard someone say that if there weren't poor people then the world would be a better place. The person saying it was a businessman running a factory with over 300 workers who had just gone on strike because of work conditions and low wage complaints. You're either on one side or the other in this world! I would guess he was more the greedy, selfish type rather than any sort of philanthropist. (-; -- Best regards, MFPA Was time invented by an Irishman named O'Clock? Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
'Ello Thomas, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:41:05 +0700 (your time) you said: S Let people... is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism S masquerading as an ideology. It is the same philosophy with which people say that everything on the internet should be free. I don't see how that can be the same. Heck, they want all software to be free and will not pay any money, for example, for an email client. I think that is a vast oversimplificationand not just necessarily so! A distinction was made very early on between commercial, shareware, freeware, donationware, cardware...blah-ware software. This was necessary because not every software author sat down at their computer to spend inordinate amounts of time tapping away at their keyboards simply because they saw the potential financial rewards ahead. Aside the above, you have everyone from Ahab who is 10, to Desidimona who is 80, with access to a computer, and they, and everyone else, want various softwares to run on their computers, otherwise computers would be useless. The term 'software' obviously covers a huge spectrum, such as Operating Systems, web browsers, email clients, bitmap editors, graph paper printers, automation software, media players, PDF viewers, privacy software, (continue on ad infinitum) etc. Just count the number of programs sitting on your computer and then calculate the cost if every single one of those was a piece of commercial software, with regular, almost yearly pay-for updates, and you realise just how ludicrous this model is. It's a nonsense. They don't want all software to be free because they are evil, they haven't just got deep enough pockets to pay for every bit of software and every update. Even within the so-called developed wealthier countries you have incredibly unequal distribution of wealth, with most of the wealth belonging to the top 7% to 12% of the population. A lot of people within these same countries live on or below subsistence levels, and then you look across the globe to other countries that are even worse off and you see that the 'you-must-pay-for-everything' model of software distrubition is just madness. It does't work, it cannot work. A few hundred pieces of software on one PC is really not an uncommon figure for many people, now calculate a total purchase price, and they a yearly fee to keep every one up to date. Far too many people don't even earn those sort of amounts each month (or even much longer) so my heart does not immediately bleed for software authors who are looking to get rich out of volume distribution and then getting angry at the bad people for not wanting to playinstead of accepting that the whole model is flawed and perhaps the whole idea needs rethinking. S I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their free time and S money that they should desist with their beneficent activities because S they should be paid for their troubles, because they are the rules, and S fairness demands it. Exactly. You will not believe how many heated arguments we had, I think the 90s were the time when users just demanded to get all software and even online time for free. They thought they had a right to be provided with free services and software. Again, an oversimplifcation. At those times 'Free' didn't actually mean 'free'. 'Free' hasn't meant gratis for a very long time. The tenner-a-month ISPs in the UK back then (the 90's) advertised their services as unlimited free access for only £10 per month :-/ People were jumping onboard because their telecoms companies were exploiting this new source of revenue from Interent access and phone bills had soared out of control. People were finding themselves with bills for hundreds of pounds a month just for connecting to the Internet to collect email and chat. When there is limited access to a money pot (which is all of the time IOW) 'people' will naturally and fairly be looking for cheaper, if not gratis, solutions for most things, and quite rightly. I support them in their efforts 100%. And it is nothing to do with valuing the efforts of others...not in the slightest. Just because you decide to create something doesn't automatically give you the right to have an income gain from it. Blimey, all the great art in the world, and all the musical masterpieces written, would never have been created if that was the way it really worked! -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #21639. I Sow Grew No Edh? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090726-1 (26.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions [now OT]
'Ello MFPA, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:21:57 +0100 (your time) you said: The problem is the greedy capitalist [insert desired expletive] who pays people just enough to stop them from leaving instead of paying the value of their contribution. I have absolutely no argument there. I completely agree that 'a workman is worthy of his hire', to steal from an old religious book. People are criminally undervalued, vastly overworked, and grossly underpaid, that's how capitalism works. This leads them to expect others to also work for next to nothing and feeds into a downward spiral that leads to nobody valuing what anybody else does. To some extent I would agree, but I don't believe that it inevitably leads to nobody valuing what anybody does, rather it makes those with less money in their pockets fight much harder to get the services and 'things' cheaper, so that they can afford them. It's a con sequence of an uneven distribution of wealth, where the least wealthy have grown in massive disporportion, have less financial power to bargain with so strive to drive down prices so that they are not excluded from partipation. I heard someone say that if there weren't poor people then the world would be a better place. The person saying it was a businessman running a factory with over 300 workers who had just gone on strike because of work conditions and low wage complaints. You're either on one side or the other in this world! -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #36541. I She Row New Dog? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090726-1 (26.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Code 2: AntispamSniper Agreed. After about 30,000 e-mail messages including 1,400 spam messages, my stats are showing 98.97% accuracy and only 0.08% false positives. I use Antispamsniper, the free version. I guess there is no way to make it work after the normal TB filters, is it? I get a large number of false positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't understand. I'd be satisfied if I could just make my filters work to save my good messages before the sniper shot'em down. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Robin Anson: On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 at 15:22:48 +0100, Privateofcourse wrote: Hello TBUDL, I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been received. I wouldn't use something that stopped or blocked SPAM for me. I don't trust anyone else to make the decision about whether something is SPAM because I have seen a small number, but that is too many, of emails incorrectly classified as SPAM. I support providers with good RBL filtering, that's the real solution. Content filtering is only useful to gather spam messages into a single folder, once you've downloaded them. I wouldn't use any mailbox with content filtering if it's the provider to manage it. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Luca, Monday, July 27, 2009, 1:57:44 PM, among other things, you wrote: L I get a large number of false L positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my L junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't L understand. Have you added TBUDL to the 'White list'? I have never had trouble with ASS throwing out TB messages. -- Best regards, Roger :flag-SouthAfrica: The Bat! v4.2.9.4 POP3with AntiSpamSniper 3.2.0.6, on Windows XP, version 5 1, build 2600 and Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Roger, Monday, July 27, 2009, 16:55:02, you wrote: I have never had trouble with ASS throwing out TB messages. Neither have I ;) -- Regards, Chrillemailto:numbe...@thebat.net Using The Bat! 4.2.9.1 AntispamSniper Pro v 3.2.1.1 Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Simon, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:40:42 +0100 GMT (27/Jul/09, 15:40 PM +0700 GMT), Simon wrote: S Let people... is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism S masquerading as an ideology. It is the same philosophy with which people say that everything on the internet should be free. S I don't see how that can be the same. Well, we were talking about free downloads, or was I mistaken? Heck, they want all software to be free and will not pay any money, for example, for an email client. S I think that is a vast oversimplificationand not just necessarily so! OK, I'll listen. S A distinction was made very early on between commercial, shareware, S freeware, donationware, cardware...blah-ware software. This was S necessary because not every software author sat down at their S computer to spend inordinate amounts of time tapping away at their S keyboards simply because they saw the potential financial rewards S ahead. I agree. In the beginning, many people wrote software for free. Then some of them realised that it is a full-time job they are doing, and they should be rewarded for it. They needed to buy some rice (or bread or potato(e)s or pasta). S Aside the above, you have everyone from Ahab who is 10, to S Desidimona who is 80, And Mary, who is 82! S with access to a computer, and they, and everyone else, want S various softwares to run on their computers, otherwise computers S would be useless. Is that so. A computer without Adobe Photoshop is not useless to me. If it is to you, maybe you want to share in the development cost of that software? S The term 'software' obviously covers a huge spectrum, such as S Operating Systems, web browsers, email clients, bitmap editors, S graph paper printers, automation software, media players, PDF S viewers, privacy software, (continue on ad infinitum) etc. Just S count the number of programs sitting on your computer and then S calculate the cost if every single one of those was a piece of S commercial software, You mean a piece of software into which the developers put their time, knowledge, and energy, and have a family to feed. S with regular, almost yearly pay-for updates, and you realise just S how ludicrous this model is. It's a nonsense. You are not serious, are you? It really does sound as if you want the developers to donate their time and knowledge for free to those who have a feeling they want to use that software. Why would you think you have a right to enslave these people to program for free for you? S They don't want all software to be free because they are evil, S they haven't just got deep enough pockets to pay for every bit of S software and every update. If you cannot afford it, you cannot use it. Same goes for expensive food or expensive cars. If you want it but cannot afford it, you have no implicit right to steal it or demand to get it for free. Sorry 'bout that, mate. S Even within the so-called developed wealthier countries you have S incredibly unequal distribution of wealth, with most of the wealth S belonging to the top 7% to 12% of the population. Pareto says 20% of the people own 80% of the wealth. Anyway, there are different percentages around, depends on who you believe. I do agree with the idea of what of you are saying, though. S A lot of people within these same countries live on or below S subsistence levels, and then you look across the globe to other S countries that are even worse off I live in a developing country, I know what you are talking about. S and you see that the 'you-must-pay-for-everything' model of S software distrubition is just madness. It does't work, it cannot S work. It is called the digital divide. Sadly enough, it exists. However, there are freeware products for everything. Some programmers choose to produce freeware and donate their time, others need to make a living and need that income from shareware. Tell me what it is that doesn't work. Living in a developing country in which the Windows OS costs as much as a monthly salary, the digital divide was certainly more than just mentioned in my MSc in Computing. S A few hundred pieces of software on one PC is really not an S uncommon figure for many people, now calculate a total purchase S price, and they a yearly fee to keep every one up to date. Far too S many people don't even earn those sort of amounts each month (or S even much longer) So they cannot afford that software and the next update. S so my heart does not immediately bleed for software authors who are S looking to get rich out of volume distribution LOL! There are several software authors reading this list, and I would not think any one of them has gotten rich. S and then getting angry at the bad people for not wanting to S playinstead of accepting that the whole model is flawed and S perhaps the whole idea needs rethinking. The model is fine. The thinking that anybody has a right to free software (or any other man-made product, for that matter) is
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Roger Phillips: Monday, July 27, 2009, 1:57:44 PM, among other things, you wrote: L I get a large number of false L positives, and I can't stop it from putting some particular messages in my L junk folder (e.g., the monthly tbul subscription reminder). It simply won't L understand. Have you added TBUDL to the 'White list'? Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to access the white list configuration. It seems like when there's some dialog open, behind other windows or offscreen, that you can't access. I can't even get to it with alt+spacebar, I have to kill TB and restart. -- Luca - e-mail: p.stevens at linuxfan.it Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Luca, Monday, July 27, 2009, 7:05:25 PM, among other things, you wrote: L Unfortunately, my version of the Sniper (3.2.1.1 free) hangs when I try to L access the white list configuration. I still run version 3.2.0.6 as I see that a number of its features are now only available in the Pro version of 3.2.1.1. However, I briefly installed 3.2.1.1 to see whether I experienced your problem and I'm sorry to say ( for your sake!)that that the White list opened normally. Did you start with 3.2.1.1 or did you upgrade from an earlier version? -- Best regards, Roger :flag-SouthAfrica: The Bat! v4.2.9.4 POP3with AntiSpamSniper 3.2.0.6, on Windows XP, version 5 1, build 2600 and Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
'Ello Thomas, On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:44:29 +0700 (your time) you said: Hello ...snip long stuff... free? Just so there is no unnecessary hostility poking through here, whatever position you are defending I am not on the other side of it threatening it in any way, so you may want to relax on the adversarial stuff. And just in case it needs to be made clear, I am not an advocate of theft, crime, stealing software, or any other such activities. Neither would I suggest that people take want they want when they want it. And I haven't proposed that everything in the world should be free for everyone, although you seem to inferring that I have. For whatever reason you maybe just misunderstanding, or maybe I am. It matters not, because I don't advocate a 'free for all' anything...or slavery :-/ My home PC has a mixture of commercial and freeware and Open Source software on itif it isn't free or within my budget it doesn't get installed. For example, I purchased TB! right back near the 'beginning' and continue to pay for upgrades. I do the same for a number of other pieces of software as well. But if all the other software I currently use was commercial software then I would never be able to afford to use much of anythingand this would severely limit what I use the computer for. I purchased WinRAR when I had DOS and WFWG 3.11 and the licence I purchased way back then has licensed me for all versions since that time. A number of software authors use this model.Rarlab still exists, and release regular updates. And without me paying, paying again, and paying again, and again... Commercial software authors are just like everyone else, vying for a portion of the pie, a slice of the limited and finite resources that people have available to them. They are selling a product and hope to convince people that it is worth paying our for...often over and over again. The simple fact is that only a few will be able to make a decent living from this practice, not the many...and those that believe that they deserve to make a living just because they are creating something are misguided, and haven't worked out that it is other people value their product, not them. If you get that wrong, then you don't get paidand you'll need to look for another way to make money. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #29051. Who Win Dog Seer? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090727-0 (27.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Privateofcourse, On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:22:48 +0100 GMT (15/Jun/09, 21:22 +0700 GMT), Privateofcourse wrote: P I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority P of so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't P really do anything other than allow you to manage SPAM P after-the-fact. That is, SPAM isn't actually blocked or stopped at P all, but is managed after it has been received. That is true, unfortunately. There are enough ways for spammers to deliver their unwanted mails. P But nonetheless, I suspect that for some this is better than P nothing at all. You can only filter at receiving end. P I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. Yes, I agree. Let people work for free, this is a centuries-old tradition. I have no idea why I pay for services, anyway. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.1.11 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Yes, I agree. Let people work for free, this is a centuries-old tradition. I have no idea why I pay for services, anyway. I pay for a spamcop.net account because reporting spammers may not stop them, but it helps dry up their sending sources. I may be shoveling against the tide but I feel that I am doing something -- Rick When you're caffeinated, all is right with the world v4.2.9.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
'Ello Thomas, On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 22:49:21 +0700 (your time) you said: P I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. Yes, I agree. Let people work for free, this is a centuries-old tradition. I have no idea why I pay for services, anyway. Let people... is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism masquerading as an ideology. I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their free time and money that they should desist with their beneficent activities because they should be paid for their troubles, because they are the rules, and fairness demands it. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #15175. We He Row Go Dins? ¶ Auxiliary Information: • The Bat! Pro 4.2.9.1 • Windows XP Pro 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 • Scanned by avast! Plugin 4.8.1335 DB 090726-1 (26.07.2009) Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Simon, On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:45:14 +0100 GMT (27/Jul/09, 5:45 AM +0700 GMT), Simon wrote: P I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. Yes, I agree. Let people work for free, this is a centuries-old tradition. I have no idea why I pay for services, anyway. S Let people... is a curious turn of phrase. Interesting, capitalism S masquerading as an ideology. It is the same philosophy with which people say that everything on the internet should be free. Heck, they want all software to be free and will not pay any money, for example, for an email client. S I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their free time and money S that they should desist with their beneficent activities because they should S be paid for their troubles, because they are the rules, and fairness demands S it. Exactly. You will not believe how many heated arguments we had, I think the 90s were the time when users just demanded to get all software and even online time for free. They thought they had a right to be provided with free services and software. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.9 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions [now OT]
Hi On Sunday 26 July 2009 at 11:45:14 PM, in mid:1853781609.20090726234...@privateofcourse.co.uk, Simon wrote: I'll remember to tell the altruist that gives up their free time and money that they should desist with their beneficent activities because they should be paid for their troubles, because they are the rules, and fairness demands it. At risk of being ruled off-topic, I will chip in that the issue is not the altruist who chooses to do it for nothing. The problem is the greedy capitalist [insert desired expletive] who pays people just enough to stop them from leaving instead of paying the value of their contribution. This leads them to expect others to also work for next to nothing and feeds into a downward spiral that leads to nobody valuing what anybody else does. -- Best regards, MFPA When duty calls...hang up immediately Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.9.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Privateofcourse, Monday, June 15, 2009, 4:22:48 PM, you wrote: I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been received. Well, yes, that's exactly what you have to expect *if* you want to deal with spam on the MUA (i.e. TB!) level. You can't really expect your email program (which typically is completely separate from your mail server) to decide which emails need to be accepted and which need to be rejected. But nonetheless, I suspect that for some this is better than nothing at all. Agree. As for me, I used to use AntispamSniper for some time (and BayesIt! before that). The main drawbacks were: - severe limitations on using encrypted connections to the server, - me wanting to access an acount from more than one PC -- this did not fit nicely with the idea of client-side filtering, - me deciding TB! was too unreliable and switching to IMAP account. For reference: my current setup is a mail server (Postfix + Dovecot) which has SpamAssassin process incoming emails. SA only flags these emails (adds rating information to header). Then, a Sieve script run by Dovecot does the actual actions: suspected spam is moved to Junk folder; if it's obvious spam it is additionally marked as Read. So, as for checking for false positives: from time to time I can review all messages that have been marked as spam, and, on a daily basis, I see the ones that were not marked as Read (i.e. not obvious). The lessons learned here are: - this works independently of the MUAs I use to access my email base (I use more than just TB!), - SA is far more thorough than any client plugins (it offers more checks, the rules are updated often, etc.), - this is a part of a bigger filtering scheme; the filtering happens on server side and I am not forced to rely on TB!'s extremely unreliable filtering; the individual email automatically get dispatched into proper folders. - I *could* implement a true spam rejection scheme by enabling e.g. greylisting in Postfix but the current setup works so well that I don't feel the need to do so. One wish I have would be for TB! to allow assigning Junk folder to a server folder -- please support my wish here: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=6483 So much for the description of my setup. It probably won't help you or your friends/ family but should allow you to set the expectations. You always can: - use an email provider that has reasonable filtering (e.g. GMail), - try to use something like AntispamSniper to filter spam. Also, I think that trying to write your own set of rules for TB!'s filter mechanism is bound to fail. This might allow you to filter out a significant part of spam volume but in practice, if you get 100 spam messages per day instead of 300, does it really help you? -- Best regards, Robert Tomanekmailto:tb...@mail.robert.tomanek.org Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hi On Friday 19 June 2009 at 10:43:13 AM, in mid:010606166.20090619104...@privateofcourse.co.uk, Privateofcourse wrote: Thanks for the detailed info. Interesting method. I personally use the old way of creating company / contact specific email aliases: everyone has their own contact email address IOW. Of course this means creating forwarders for every new contact, but then you can identify immediately where SPAM has come from...and inform whoever it is that has leaked the email address that they've got a problem. I also then delete the forwarder for them and give them a new, 'clean' alias/contact email address. For this purpose I use a separate domain name to my personal (friends and family only IOW) one, and of course there is a default address that I give out if I can't set up a new forwarder for someone/a contact there and then. When I'm next at my PC I'll set up a new forwarder for whoever it is and send them an email asking them to update their contact details. I use catch-all forwarding rather than setting up lots of forwarders and make use of filters in TB! to dump mail addressed to any unrecognised alias into an other incoming folder. Not as rigorous as your system but it means I can invent contact email addresses on the fly if I want and set up filters for them later. I also create a monthly temp alias with a 8 digit code. Eg. temp.yu854...@domain.co.uk and use this for all other contact forms and such like. Every month I simply delete the alias and create a new one, excluding the temp address, this particular setup is near as dammit 100% SPAM free. I used to do this six-monthly but now change it annually, unless SPAM catches up with it. It rarely gets more than 3 or 4 SPAM messages a day. I also use a separate yahoo addresss for this and two other mailing lists, which I change annually or thereabouts. For signing up on websites I tend to use disposible address services - pookmail.com and dodgmail.com seem to be defunct now but getonemail.com still worked recently. My personal email does get occasional SPAM, and I keep having to update the filters in cPanel. But I've just been reading about the free Comodo AntiSpam software, which is a free challenge and response system. This 'looks' promising, and may be the solution I've been looking for my personal communications. Some people seem to like those challenge/response things. I never reply to them as they look like some sort of attempt to harvest valid email addresses. Even if genuine, anybody who makes it that awkward to contact them must be pretty special for me to bother with them (-; -- Best regards, MFPA A bird in the hand makes it awfully hard to blow your nose Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Raymond and Jens, This is what you both said on Mon, 15 Jun 2009: AntispamSniper [...] Thanks, I'll take a look myself first, and then assess whether saying nothing would be better (for me) than suggesting it ;-) -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #23818. God Hews No Weir? ¶ TB! 4.2.4 WinXP Pro Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Chrille, This is what you said on Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:21:21 +0200 your time: I use Antispamsniper Pro and I'm extremely satisfied with it. I believe they have a free edition as well. Thanks, I'll take a look at the free version :-) JOOC, does it not 'stick in your craw' that by buying a solution *you* have ended up picking up the tab for dealing with SPAM? It rather seems to me that we have a situation where the SPAMer is on the make, the solution provider is on the make, and everyone else forms the big pocket that both parties want to dip into. This may seem a bit cynical, but there ya go ;-) -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #21123. Row Gown Die Hes? ¶ TB! 4.2.4 WinXP Pro Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Paul, This is what you said on Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:47:13 +1000 your time: I get nearly all spam, do not use an external filter yet. My ISP offers free spam filtering, so I use this. It stops the download of 60% to 70%. I use internal mail filters along these lines: [...snip...] Thanks for the detailed info. Interesting method. I personally use the old way of creating company / contact specific email aliases: everyone has their own contact email address IOW. Of course this means creating forwarders for every new contact, but then you can identify immediately where SPAM has come from...and inform whoever it is that has leaked the email address that they've got a problem. I also then delete the forwarder for them and give them a new, 'clean' alias/contact email address. For this purpose I use a separate domain name to my personal (friends and family only IOW) one, and of course there is a default address that I give out if I can't set up a new forwarder for someone/a contact there and then. When I'm next at my PC I'll set up a new forwarder for whoever it is and send them an email asking them to update their contact details. I also create a monthly temp alias with a 8 digit code. Eg. temp.yu854...@domain.co.uk and use this for all other contact forms and such like. Every month I simply delete the alias and create a new one, excluding the temp address, this particular setup is near as dammit 100% SPAM free. My personal email does get occasional SPAM, and I keep having to update the filters in cPanel. But I've just been reading about the free Comodo AntiSpam software, which is a free challenge and response system. This 'looks' promising, and may be the solution I've been looking for my personal communications. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) # 9200. I Hog Wend Sower? ¶ TB! 4.2.4 WinXP Pro Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello tb...@thebat., Friday, June 19, 2009, 7:43:13 PM, you wrote: P Hello Paul, ...snip P My personal email does get occasional SPAM, and I keep having to update the P filters in cPanel. But I've just been reading about the free Comodo AntiSpam P software, which is a free challenge and response system. This 'looks' P promising, and may be the solution I've been looking for my personal P communications. Your method looks pretty good. If you need an excellent service for creating disposable email addresses, I recommend gishpuppy.com -- Paul - Using The Bat! v4.2.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 ...The best cure for insomnia is to get a lot of sleep. Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello tb...@thebat., Tuesday, June 16, 2009, 12:22:48 AM, you wrote: P Hello TBUDL, P What do TB! users consider to be the P 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? P 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? ...snip I get nearly all spam, do not use an external filter yet. My ISP offers free spam filtering, so I use this. It stops the download of 60% to 70%. I use internal mail filters along these lines: Not using Selective Download. Sequence of filters is important: Incoming Mail Not using Selective Download. Sequence is important: Incoming Mail The Bat Filters 25 December 2006 Not use Selective Download. Sequence is important Incoming Mail The Bat Header contains TBUDL Or Header contains tbudl Or Header contains thebat.dutaint.com Action: Move to folder …TheBat SpamHeader contains mpx.com Or Sender contains about 6 filters for spammers Action: Move to folder …Trash From PBSender contains berg...@optusnet.com.au RamblersHeader contains ramblers Or Recipient contains bcqoxctfi...@spammotel.com Action: Move to folder …Ramblers Reply Welcome Address Book contains sender Or Recipient contains spammotel.com Or Header contains mailnull.com Or Header contains my-etrust.com Or Sender contains melbpc.org.au Or Sender contains optusnet.com.au And about 20 other senders Action: Move to folder …Welcome Access Sender contains Access Action: Move to folder …Access SIG Spam Last Filter Recipient does not contain berg...@optusnet.com.au And Recipient does not contain mailnull.com And Recipient does not contain spammotel.com Action: Move to folder …Trash As you can see, the idea is to first pick out the mail that you want to put in separate folders. Had to add a filter for emails sent by me and put them in a separate folder to glance at and trash, because spammers are now spoofing my address as sender. Then finally you trash the emails that are not addressed to you - they are addressed to you in an outer layer, which is dicarded before you see them; inside they appear with different addressees. The rubbish is left in the Inbox and in From PB folders. Here you set the sort order by Subject for a quick glance at everything. Will be intereted in the replies you get for other solutions. The spammers are very quick to find a new address. I changed the disposable address on a web site, and got spam a few days later. -- Paul - Using The Bat! v4.2.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 ...I cna ytpe 300 wrods pre mniuet!!! Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
anti-SPAM solutions
Hello TBUDL, What do TB! users consider to be the 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? First, this isn't for me, as I manage SPAM via convoluted email practises and via cPanel, and so for a lot of years now I've not had much of a problem with SPAM - well of course I do get a few bits of SPAM every now and then, but only enough to be slightly irritated by them getting through. This question is really for friends and family that I've converted to TB! over the years. Many of them use their ISP mail accounts, and the like, and so and are after alternative solutions to dealing with SPAM. As I've not used any of the TB! plugins or used the external solutions, like SPAMPAL and Mailwasher Pro for some time, I thought I'd ask people with more up-to-date experiences. I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been received. But nonetheless, I suspect that for some this is better than nothing at all. I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. -- Simon (Privateofcourse) #18866. Her Wow Gins Oed? ¶ TB! 4.2.4 WinXP Pro Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Privateofcourse, Monday, June 15, 2009, 9:22:48 AM, you wrote: Hello TBUDL, What do TB! users consider to be the 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? First, this isn't for me, as I manage SPAM via convoluted email practises and via cPanel, and so for a lot of years now I've not had much of a problem with SPAM - well of course I do get a few bits of SPAM every now and then, but only enough to be slightly irritated by them getting through. This question is really for friends and family that I've converted to TB! over the years. Many of them use their ISP mail accounts, and the like, and so and are after alternative solutions to dealing with SPAM. As I've not used any of the TB! plugins or used the external solutions, like SPAMPAL and Mailwasher Pro for some time, I thought I'd ask people with more up-to-date experiences. I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been received. But nonetheless, I suspect that for some this is better than nothing at all. I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. AntispamSniper -- Best regards, Raymond Morris TheBat! Voyager 4.1.11.1 www.ritlabs.com AntispamSniper 3.2.0.6 for The Bat! Voyager rmorri...@gmail.com :texasflag: Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
Hello Privateofcourse, Monday, June 15, 2009, 16:22:48, you wrote: Hello TBUDL, What do TB! users consider to be the 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? I think the emphasis though must be on free solutions. I use Antispamsniper Pro and I'm extremely satisfied with it. I believe they have a free edition as well. -- Regards, Chrillemailto:numbe...@thebat.net Using The Bat! 4.2.6 Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
What do TB! users consider to be the 1) the best external SPAM management solution for TB! users? 2) the best internal SPAM management solution for TB! users? AntispamSniper Agreed. After about 30,000 e-mail messages including 1,400 spam messages, my stats are showing 98.97% accuracy and only 0.08% false positives. AntispamSniper required ongoing training in the initial months, but now it nabs the spam very reliably. -- Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: anti-SPAM solutions
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 at 15:22:48 +0100, Privateofcourse wrote: Hello TBUDL, I've done a bit of leg work, but it seems to me that the majority of so-called 'SPAM blocker/stopper' solutions don't and can't really do anything other than allow you to manage SPAM after-the-fact. That is, SPAM isn't actually blocked or stopped at all, but is managed after it has been received. I wouldn't use something that stopped or blocked SPAM for me. I don't trust anyone else to make the decision about whether something is SPAM because I have seen a small number, but that is too many, of emails incorrectly classified as SPAM. However I use a combination of Popfile and Antispam Sniper for the Bat Free. Either by itself is very good, the combination is excellent. -- Robin Using The Bat! v4.1.11 Windows Vista 6.0 Build 6002 Service Pack 2 Popfile v1.1.0 Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
