--------- Original Message --------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [xmail] Re: fighting against spam...
Date: 02/05/04 09:10

>
> &gt; [snip]About spam,
> &gt; people should be more carefull where they enter their email adresses
and
> &gt; also list administrators could make list more secure (at least to
> &gt; prevent listing the list to see who is subscribed). This and only
this
> &gt; is the problem of spam.
>
>
> I strongly disagree here.  Spammers are actively scanning every domain for
> valid email addresses.  Even if you have an email address that nobody
knows
> about, it will eventually get bombed with spam.  Just watch the logs
closely
> on any busy email server, and you will see one dictionary attack after the
> next.  Blaming spam on the end user receiving it is simply wrong.  I agree
> some people unwisely bring extra spam on themselves by posting all over
the
> place using their email address, but spammers will find their email
address
> even if they do not do that.
>
> There is technology already available to us to filter much of the spam. 
To
> filter the majority fo all spam, you need to use a mixture of methods. 
One
> very good idea is to block every known open relay, since spammers still
rely
> heavily on those open relays.  The ORDB RBL is a list of all known open
> relays, and it definitely blocks a lot of spam.  SpamAssassin also helps
> noticably.  With SpamAssassin, you really need to train the engine on ham
> and spam periodically to make sure it catches a high amount.  Spammers
will
> constantly change their patterns to trick SpamAssassin, so manually
teaching
> it the spam it misses is a critical function.  And of course, you should
> require all of your own users to use SMTP AUTH to relay email.  This way
all
> email relayed through your box will contain an X-Auth header, so you can
> quickly track down the user if one of your users is sending spam.
>
> To decrease a large amount of incoming spam, we need a solution to stop
from
> address forging.  The proposals like RMX would definitely help reduce a
> significant amount of spam.  Any solution that noticably cuts down on
> address forging will also noticably cut down on spam, since most spam is
> sent with forged addresses.
>

I agree with Shiloh's assessment.  Please don't blame me for the crap I
receive in my inbox.

Also, I'd like to re-emphasize that a mixture of methods is needed to filter
the junk.  Using one method isn't enough in my experience.  SpamAssassin
offers many methods and uses a scoring mechanism of the different methods to
 determine spam.  There are probably other similar methods, but this is the
best I've seen.

To address the original issue - fighting against spam, filtering doesn't
fight spam, it removes the symptoms instead of fixing the disease.  Which
for some people is ok -- if I don't see the spam in my inbox (because of
filtering) then that's just as good as never receiving it.

-Don

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to