I agree, $1,000 is way too much for a home user but for a business
it's not bad considering there are no 'annual renewals', and there's
no reason why an ISP couldn't put it in front of your mail.
It's a cat and mouse game without a doubt. We have had some success
with Mail Essentials over the years but it's a constant game for both
sides and whichever solution you throw at spam it's only a matter of
time before it's sidestepped. The best you can hope for is a
temporary reduction in spam and right now we're processing 82% less
mail than last week which is working my server a lot less so I like
that.
Ironically, after I sent this, I had my first bad experience with the
DS200. A vendor of ours is sending email that never makes it. After
learning of the problem I whitelisted the sending server's IP and the
log now shows their emails as being Accepted and Whitelisted but we
never get the messages. Part of the problem may be that their IP
resolves to a different domain but I have yet to speak to the vendor's
IT guy so we can determine if they are getting bounces or anything.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
On 2/7/06, Bill Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If it continues to prove effective, I sure hope someone comes out with
> something an order of magnitude (or more) cheaper. $1K for SPAM blocking is
> beyond the reach of most email users, but SOMETHING for sure is needed.
>
> Coincidentally, I was in correspondence just this morning with the host of a
> couple of my domains asking what had happened to their server level SPAM
> blocking, which has been extremely effective since implemented about 8
> months ago, with (AFAIK) almost no false positives. Here is a part of his
> reply:
>
> "Unfortunately it is not us who stopped using spam blacklists, but rather
> spammers who are getting smarter by the day. Most recent spam is sent from
> compromised residential internet connections and as soon as that IP is
> blacklisted the spammers simply find another computer to use. Therefore, the
> only way to effectively combat spam is going to be actual message filtering
> which would require a very complex and resource intensive system.
>
> As much as I wanted to avoid setting up a content filter it appears that we
> have no other choice. We have created such a system and are in the process
> of deploying it. It is active on some servers, just not yet on the one
> you're on. We are hoping to have it available everywhere by the end of the
> weekend."
>
> IVO the above, I wonder how DEEP SIX will handle the use of compromised
> residential machines to generate SPAM? I don't expect an answer to that;
> just wondering if they have really come up with "a better mousetrap." In the
> last couple of weeks, I went from 3-5% SPAM to better than 85%. If I notice
> any significant reduction will drop another line on the subject...
--
----------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is your picture included in the Official Win-Home List Members Profiles Page?
http://www.besteffort.com/winhome/Profiles.html
If not, write to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
