SPAM filters

Forums › LAN (ethernet/Wifi/routers/Bluetooth) › SPAM filters

signz

95 posts

Master Geek

#16551 15-Oct-2007 21:59

I just took a look at my SPAM filter stats and each user account varies from 80% through to 99% of received mail is SPAM. Overall average is 89%.

Now the 99% is on a low usage user that has probably never given their name to any web site, user group or internet marketer. It's been harvested. She gets 20% more spam than I do and my name is plastered in quite a few places.

Anyway, the point was that my Spam filter (SpamFighter SMTP) was down for a few days while I moved some servers around and I was FLOODED with crap. It proved it's worth when it came back on line.

Is the rest of the world suffering or do you all have good Spam filters?

DS

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41025

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#91166 15-Oct-2007 22:03

I use the built-in Exchange Server IMF, and it filters about 600 messages a day. It doesn't bother me because it does such a good work that I never see a spam in my Inbox...

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

BartManGeek

187 posts

Master Geek

#91470 18-Oct-2007 10:44

Where I work we run a Barracuda Spam Firewall, these are the stats since we installed it in January:

	Total	Day	Hour

Blocked	1,795,222	3,611	228
Blocked: Virus	1,778	0	0
Quarantined	3,512	3	0
Allowed: Tagged	5,660	1	0
Allowed	265,434	345	52

Total Received	2,071,606	3,960	280

A 12.8% acceptance ratio. This is for a site with two domain names and about 800 mailboxes.

On my own domain name I run a linux based server and using SpamAssasin and I achieve about the same ratio.

I got put off Exchange IMF when I had a large number of false positives.

I would rather have one or ten junk emails come through, than loose one valid email.

Bart.

Rural Geek - Technology Solutions

"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." -- Charles Babbage

chiefie

I iz your trusted friend
5877 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 151

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#91474 18-Oct-2007 10:51

Bart, do you tune your IMF? I find Exchange 2003 SP2 IMF (on Windows Server 2003 R2 SBS) is working great. And I also use IMF Companion to monitor spam/filtered folder to "pickup" false positive and send them over to the Pickup folder for deliver to mailboxes.

The IMF Companion uses the collected spam/filtered folder to build its spam confidence, and you can also add whitelist straight to IMF Companion, so it can parse the false positive correctly. This is done after Exchange 2003's IMF filteration which I also have set up to use SpamAssassin service to monitor all incoming emails.

My IMF settings are moderately restrictive, so it filtered out a lot of baddies and so far had very little or no false positive.

However, over the last 3 days, i noticed there's been a surge in spam, all caught by IMFs.

Internet is my backyard...

«Geekzone blog: Tech 'n Chips Takeaway» «Personal blog: And then...»

Please read the Geekzone's FUG

BartManGeek

187 posts

Master Geek

#91475 18-Oct-2007 11:00

My experience with IMF was when I was supporting 15-20 SBS2003 sites and there was not the time for this fine-tuning as I was mainly in a break-fix role. I will play around with IMF some more at the end of the year.

Thanks,
Bart