I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most of 
the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.

This doesn't appear in the reviews or descriptions, so do any of you gents 
use any kit which is wise to the likes of V!@gra and rollecks as well as 
'Increase your length by 3 inches'?

I made the mistake of mixing my personal with on-site address on Crackguitar 
before I got form mail. I even get Dutch (I think) spam now, to a total of 
~150 a day.

Oh, and I will pay out for this or I have to drop the del@

Cheers,

-dE|_---

"dE|_"  writes:
> I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most of 
> the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.
> 
> This doesn't appear in the reviews or descriptions, so do any of you gents 
> use any kit which is wise to the likes of V!@gra and rollecks as well as 
> 'Increase your length by 3 inches'?
> 
> I made the mistake of mixing my personal with on-site address on Crackguitar 
> before I got form mail. I even get Dutch (I think) spam now, to a total of 
> ~150 a day.
> 
> Oh, and I will pay out for this or I have to drop the del@

Spamassassin works well for me (make sure you enable the various DNS
blacklists). It works even better once 'trained', which you can do by
waiting until about 500 spam messages get past it, and then giving
sa-learn those messages and a similar amount of legitimate messages
(and then make sure you also give it anything it miscategorises after
that so it keeps learning). You'll probably want to increase the
sensitivity a bit from the default, too - legitimate emails for me are
incredibly rare above about +1.5 spam score, though that number will
probably differ for you. Anyway, it blocks well over 99% of spam for me.

It's free, but if you're willing to pay it won't be too hard to find
people who'll set it up for you.

I've heard good things about bogofilter as well (also free) but never
used it myself.

-- 
Chris

"Chris Morris"  wrote in message
news:87prqctn49.fsf@dinopsis.dur.ac.uk...
> "dE|_"  writes:
>> I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, 
>> most
>> of
>> the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.
>>
>> This doesn't appear in the reviews or descriptions, so do any of you
>> gents
>> use any kit which is wise to the likes of V!@gra and rollecks as well 
>> as
>> 'Increase your length by 3 inches'?
>>
>> I made the mistake of mixing my personal with on-site address on
>> Crackguitar
>> before I got form mail. I even get Dutch (I think) spam now, to a total
>> of
>> ~150 a day.
>>
>> Oh, and I will pay out for this or I have to drop the del@
>
> Spamassassin works well for me (make sure you enable the various DNS
> blacklists). It works even better once 'trained', which you can do by
> waiting until about 500 spam messages get past it, and then giving
> sa-learn those messages and a similar amount of legitimate messages
> (and then make sure you also give it anything it miscategorises after
> that so it keeps learning). You'll probably want to increase the
> sensitivity a bit from the default, too - legitimate emails for me are
> incredibly rare above about +1.5 spam score, though that number will
> probably differ for you. Anyway, it blocks well over 99% of spam for me.
>
> It's free, but if you're willing to pay it won't be too hard to find
> people who'll set it up for you.

I don't mean to sound un-appreaciative, but it's usually set up in the
software and updated for £20 - £30 a year.

> I've heard good things about bogofilter as well (also free) but never
> used it myself.

Thanks,

-dE|_--- 


___________________________________________________________________________
I use the Vade Retro (http://www.vade-retro.com/desktop) antispam 
software, to protect my mail-box against junk mail.
Since its installation, Vade Retro blocked 5 spams on 10 messages 
received.

I use popfile which so far has been excellent and lets very little through.

  http://getpopfile.org

Steve

dE|_ wrote:
> I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most of 
> the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.
>

"Steve Y" wrote up here...
>I use popfile which so far has been excellent and lets very little 
>through.
>
>  http://getpopfile.org
>
> dE|_ wrote:
>> I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, 
>> most of the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters 
>> anymore.
>>

Any accidental killing of kosher mail?

-dE|_--- 


___________________________________________________________________________
I use the Vade Retro (http://www.vade-retro.com/desktop) antispam 
software, to protect my mail-box against junk mail.
Since its installation, Vade Retro blocked 18 spams on 20 messages 
received.

"dE|_" wrote;
various replies whilst testing a trial version, then discovered that it was 
planting self promoting signatures
on my mail & posts.

Gob-smacked, embarrased, and uninstalled.

-dE|_---

On 20/6/08 11:04 am, in article QgL6k.35152$8k.17098@newsfe18.ams2, "dE|_"
 wrote:

> I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most of
> the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.
> 
> This doesn't appear in the reviews or descriptions, so do any of you gents
> use any kit which is wise to the likes of V!@gra and rollecks as well as
> 'Increase your length by 3 inches'?
> 
> I made the mistake of mixing my personal with on-site address on Crackguitar
> before I got form mail. I even get Dutch (I think) spam now, to a total of
> ~150 a day.
> 
> Oh, and I will pay out for this or I have to drop the del@

Active Spam Killer.  It will kill just about anything.  The only trouble is
that it uses the system when someone e-mails you the first time they get a
reply that they then have to reply to.  If they reply, they get added to
your whitelist and the original mail plus any in the future will get
through.  It works on the basis that most spammers won't reply.  You can
also send yourself an e-mail with the subject 'ask process queue' and it
will send you a list of all the ones that haven't been replied to.  If you
spot a genuine one then you just reply and stick a D in front of the address
for deliver and whitelist.

It's very clever.  I used it for a long time but then changed servers and
haven't got round to installing it.  I now use Spam Assassin and I find it
can be a bit hit and miss.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:04:28 +0100, "dE|_"
 wrote:

>I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most of 
>the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.

For client-side, try Mailwasher Pro. It works very well for me.

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:11:25 +0100, Andy Jacobs
 wrote:

>Active Spam Killer.  It will kill just about anything.  The only trouble is
>that it uses the system when someone e-mails you the first time they get a
>reply that they then have to reply to.

And as such, any user of this "solution" is re-sending spam to the
e-mail addresses of all the innocent saps in the forged From: address.
Avoid anything like this at all costs.

"Stuart Millington"  wrote in message
news:c71o54t0847n3a1i9200871fj17lc85ahg@4ax.com...

> For client-side, try Mailwasher Pro. It works very well for me.

I endorse MWP (but not all the other stuff that Firetrust will try to sell
you when you join up).  Advantage: no false positives, and if you do delete
anything that you afterwards realised was valid, you can get at least a good
chunk back again so long as you realise within a few days.  So it's good for
control freaks who don't like to delegate the job of deciding what's good.
But, compared to software that works more automatically, it is a pain after
a holiday when you have several weeks' spam to deal with in one go.

The worst problem I've found is when some B*****D has used my domain in a
fake From on a huge spam splurge, and I get 1000s (literally) of bounces.
Usually they seem to rotate From addresses so it only goes on for a few
days.  Even so, it has got to the point where I sometimes reject all bounces
unseen, but that does leave the possibility of a bounce from a genuine email
of mine being missed.

-- 
Tony W
My e-mail address has no hyphen
- but please don't use it, reply to the group.

On 20/6/08 8:29 pm, in article c71o54t0847n3a1i9200871fj17lc85ahg@4ax.com,
"Stuart Millington"  wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:04:28 +0100, "dE|_"
>  wrote:
> 
>> I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most of
>> the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.
> 
> For client-side, try Mailwasher Pro. It works very well for me.
> 
But it's client side which still leaves you having to download hundreds of
e-mails.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

On 20/6/08 8:31 pm, in article 391o54pv4dds5vlm5k64tt2cch4g8vpskn@4ax.com,
"Stuart Millington"  wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:11:25 +0100, Andy Jacobs
>  wrote:
> 
>> Active Spam Killer.  It will kill just about anything.  The only trouble is
>> that it uses the system when someone e-mails you the first time they get a
>> reply that they then have to reply to.
> 
> And as such, any user of this "solution" is re-sending spam to the
> e-mail addresses of all the innocent saps in the forged From: address.
> Avoid anything like this at all costs.
> 

Then that in itself is a symptom that needs to be sorted.  It's no good
passing up a solution that solves your problem just because someone else has
a problem that they should solve.

If SPF was more widely supported by default then forged e-mails would be a
thing of the past anyway.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

dE|_ wrote:
> I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most of 
> the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.
> 
> This doesn't appear in the reviews or descriptions, so do any of you gents 
> use any kit which is wise to the likes of V!@gra and rollecks as well as 
> 'Increase your length by 3 inches'?
> 
> I made the mistake of mixing my personal with on-site address on Crackguitar 
> before I got form mail. I even get Dutch (I think) spam now, to a total of 
> ~150 a day.
> 
> Oh, and I will pay out for this or I have to drop the del@
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -dE|_--- 
> 
> 

A couple of years ago I was gettng 2,500 spams sent to me a day.  Since 
then I've switched ISP to Demon, whose "Brightmail" facility gets rid of 
  at least 99.5% of it so I never see it.  If one slips through, you can 
send a copy to a monitoring address.  Meanwhile, I'm using Outlook 2003, 
and that catches almost everything that does get through.  I see maybe a 
dozen spams in my junk mail folder (half of which are false positives) 
and I'm genuinely surprised if one makes it through to my inbox.  I'm 
not aware of missing any genuine email.

Phil, London

I am surprised by the reply, I've used it on 5 PCs over 4 years and 
never seen any trace of it adding anything other than the SPAM header I 
asked it to. I have only used it on a client though

Steve

dE|_ wrote:
> "dE|_" wrote;
> various replies whilst testing a trial version, then discovered that it was 
> planting self promoting signatures
> on my mail & posts.
> 
> Gob-smacked, embarrased, and uninstalled.
> 
> -dE|_--- 
> 
>

"Andy Jacobs"  wrote in message 
news:C4827229.11737%nospam@redcatgroup.co.uk...
>> For client-side, try Mailwasher Pro. It works very well for me.
> But it's client side which still leaves you having to download hundreds of
> e-mails.
You can select how much of each email to download.  I download 200 lines 
which is enough to detect spam, and a great deal faster than downloading 
everything.  MWP will not run scripts, interpret HTML or execute files so 
even if an email contains a nasty it is safe.  Deletion of unwanted mail off 
the server(s) is very fast as MWP makes multiple connections.  I am not 
trying to sell this SW, it has its down side but so do they all.
-- 
Tony W
My e-mail address has no hyphen
- but please don't use it, reply to the group.

"Stuart Millington" wrote...
>
>>I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most 
>>of
>>the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.
>
> For client-side, try Mailwasher Pro. It works very well for me.

Thanks, downloaded and about to install the free trial. No doubt it will 
leave signatures on mail posts too so I write this first (yes I still usenet 
with OE).

I'm a bit too hung-over to take on what Tony was rambling about, but I'm 
hoping MWP is self configuring.

I could never use one of those mail systems which auto replies to the sender 
telling them that their first mail is awaiting approval etc. The first time 
I encountered that it just came across as plain pretentious.

-dE|_---

"Steve Y" wrote...
>I am surprised by the reply, I've used it on 5 PCs over 4 years and never 
>seen any trace of it adding anything other than the SPAM header I asked it 
>to. I have only used it on a client though
>
> Steve
>
> dE|_ wrote:
>> "dE|_" wrote;
>> various replies whilst testing a trial version, then discovered that it 
>> was planting self promoting signatures
>> on my mail & posts.
>>
>> Gob-smacked, embarrased, and uninstalled.
>>
>> -dE|_--- 
>>

It's not 'getpopfile' I was testing or that was doing the signing. Look at 
the bottom of my earlier replies to you and Chris Morris.

-dE|_---

PS; you should write your replies under the original post.

"Stuart Millington" wrote...
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:04:28 +0100, "dE|_"
>  wrote:
>
>>I've been looking at some anti-spam software, but as you will know, most 
>>of
>>the spam is not spelt correctly or even in plain characters anymore.
>
> For client-side, try Mailwasher Pro. It works very well for me.
>

_Not_ impressed. It's let through mails with subjects of 'increased 
ejaculation volume', and body content selling 'penis enlargement pills' & 
'3000 porn DVDs'.

Vade Retro Anti-Spam caught every one of the bundle and it sits inside 
Outlook as a toolbar.

-dE|_---

Popfile was originally available via Sourceforge 
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/popfile/)  I presume they had to go for 
getpopfile as a domain name because someone already booked the other 
domain names

Didn't see anything untoward on your earlier replies

As for Top Posting v Bottom Posting, I can't be bothered to get into a 
discussion

Steve

dE|_ wrote:

> It's not 'getpopfile' I was testing or that was doing the signing. Look at 
> the bottom of my earlier replies to you and Chris Morris.
> 
> -dE|_---
> 
> PS; you should write your replies under the original post. 
> 
>

"Steve Y" wrote ...
> Popfile was originally available via Sourceforge 
> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/popfile/)  I presume they had to go for 
> getpopfile as a domain name because someone already booked the other 
> domain names
>
> Didn't see anything untoward on your earlier replies

Look at my first reply to your first post where I asked about 'killing of 
kosher mail'. Look under my own -dE|_--- signature.

There's 4 bloody lines of product promotion down there.

You are obviously seeing stuff I am not

This is your reply dated 20/06/08 20:16 in its entirety

.....................................................
"dE|_" wrote;
various replies whilst testing a trial version, then discovered that it was
planting self promoting signatures
on my mail & posts.

Gob-smacked, embarrased, and uninstalled.

-dE|_---
..............................................

Can send you a screendump if you don't believe me

Steve


dE|_ wrote:

> There's 4 bloody lines of product promotion down there. 
> 
>

"Steve Y"  wrote in message 
news:6c53bnF3f6seuU1@mid.individual.net...
> You are obviously seeing stuff I am not
>
> This is your reply dated 20/06/08 20:16 in its entirety
>
> .....................................................
> "dE|_" wrote;
> various replies whilst testing a trial version, then discovered that it 
> was
> planting self promoting signatures
> on my mail & posts.
>
> Gob-smacked, embarrased, and uninstalled.
>
> -dE|_---
> ..............................................
>
> Can send you a screendump if you don't believe me
>
> Steve

Read the post dimwit, I'd uninstalled it by then.

Try an earlier one, I'm of down the pub.

-dE|_---

<uk.net.web.authoring>
<dE|_>
<Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:07:22 +0100>
<Zbd7k.51216$8H5.3300@newsfe10.ams2>

> Read the post dimwit
> 

Way the go del - your learning .

For the more you learn about web authoring and stuff the less tolerant 
you tend to become .

Although never forget that we where all newbies once .


-- 
www.krustov.co.uk

Think I'll file this under "conversations with planks" and go and do 
something else

Steve
dE|_ wrote:
> "Steve Y"  wrote in message 

> Read the post dimwit, I'd uninstalled it by then.
> 
> Try an earlier one, I'm of down the pub.
> 
> -dE|_--- 
> 
>

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:15:18 +0100, "dE|_"
 wrote:

>_Not_ impressed. It's let through mails with subjects of 'increased 
>ejaculation volume', and body content selling 'penis enlargement pills' & 
>'3000 porn DVDs'.

You have to tell it you want it to automatically delete spam. It's in
the filter options.

"Stuart Millington" wrote...
>
>>_Not_ impressed. It's let through mails with subjects of 'increased
>>ejaculation volume', and body content selling 'penis enlargement pills' &
>>'3000 porn DVDs'.
>
> You have to tell it you want it to automatically delete spam. It's in
> the filter options.
>

It's not that it didn't delete it- it didn't even recognise it as spam. They 
were labelled in green with [Good].

That's like Abu Hamza walking past George Bush's security with a chainsaw.

-dE|_---

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:42:28 +0100, "dE|_"
 wrote:

>It's not that it didn't delete it- it didn't even recognise it as spam. They 
>were labelled in green with [Good].
>
>That's like Abu Hamza walking past George Bush's security with a chainsaw.

No, it's like a heuristic engine that needs a few days training before
it does what *you* want (compared to something with absolute, fixed,
rules that does what its author wants).

Still, if it's not what you're looking for, it's not what you're
looking for ;-)