Hello Michiel, Tuesday, June 6, 2006, 3:10:52 AM, you wrote:
> > Crew, > > > > I'm a bit concerned about the amount of spam that Sniffer's not > getting. It used to be a near 99% catch rate, but now it looks like it's > down to 70%...? > > > > I opened my own mailbox this morning and saw 5 false negatives, > while 11 others were caught by Sniffer. Haven't checked with my > clients yet, but I think it will be the same. > > > > Is there an explanation, besides another spam storm? IMO, the spam storm explanation is certainly applicable today - we've seen a few spikes, this time bunched together in an unusual - nearly continuous chain... still working on a theory for that. In general, the image based spam trend has given everyone more challenges.. I'm working on engine upgrades that will be out soon to help with those and future threats. Another thing that may have effected the last few days is that our primary spam-trap processor "ate itself" causing large backlogs and heavy fragmentation. There were a few hours (off-and-on) where the box was not processing traffic so we were delayed responding with new rules. I've changed the software on that box and cleaned up the damage and it is now happily sustaining ~900 msgs/minute so I don't expect further problems from it in the short term. Hope this helps, _M -- Pete McNeil Chief Scientist, Arm Research Labs, LLC. ############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list <[email protected]>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
