Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
This week's list of EMAIL SPAMMERs. If your ISP is on this list, you
cannot send me EMAIL. 3796 webrobot@* -- Email sent to is never read. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
Harry, I don't know how you developed this list, but I suspect it was
by compiling the From: tags in spam. Most of those are fake anyway, and there's nothing wrong with those ISPs anti-spam policy. A fairly simple solution to the spam problem is to install Mozilla and use the spam filter in its mail reader. It works quite well, especially after a little simple training: if it misses one (false negative) or marks something spam that isn't (false positive) one mouse click corrects both the immediate problem and retrains the filter. -- Chuck Tribolet http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/people/triblet Silicon Valley: STILL the best day job in the world. "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... This week's list of EMAIL SPAMMERs. If your ISP is on this list, you cannot send me EMAIL. 3796 webrobot@* -- Email sent to is never read. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
Chuck Tribolet wrote:
Harry, I don't know how you developed this list, but I suspect it was by compiling the From: tags in spam. Most of those are fake anyway, and there's nothing wrong with those ISPs anti-spam policy. A fairly simple solution to the spam problem is to install Mozilla and use the spam filter in its mail reader. It works quite well, especially after a little simple training: if it misses one (false negative) or marks something spam that isn't (false positive) one mouse click corrects both the immediate problem and retrains the filter. I use Mailwasher, Chuck. Blacklists the crap before it gets to my Mozilla. I never even see it. -- Email sent to is never read. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 07:35:59 -0800, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote:
Harry, I don't know how you developed this list, but I suspect it was by compiling the From: tags in spam. Most of those are fake anyway, and there's nothing wrong with those ISPs anti-spam policy. A fairly simple solution to the spam problem is to install Mozilla and use the spam filter in its mail reader. It works quite well, especially after a little simple training: if it misses one (false negative) or marks something spam that isn't (false positive) one mouse click corrects both the immediate problem and retrains the filter. Because spam is such a moving target, no one approach is going to. Blacklists, filters and blackhole lists are all helpful, but no one approach will do the trick. I've been a mostly happy Mailwasher user for the last several months. Here are my spam stats for this past week: Filters: 8,739 RBL lists: 2,745 Blacklist: 1,524 My mail has been consistently 90% spam. Although Mailwasher either flags or deletes the mail from the server before I download it, there is still always the risk of false positives. I had Mailwasher delete spam without my intervention for about a week, but discovered I was losing legitimate mail. For me, that's the real outrage about spam. Joe Parsons |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
Mozilla is user-trainable, so the moving target isn't a problem. When it
misses one, you just mark it as spam, Mozilla gets retrained a little, and it gets dropped in the Junk folder. -- Chuck Tribolet http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/people/triblet Silicon Valley: STILL the best day job in the world. "Joe Parsons" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 07:35:59 -0800, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Harry, I don't know how you developed this list, but I suspect it was by compiling the From: tags in spam. Most of those are fake anyway, and there's nothing wrong with those ISPs anti-spam policy. A fairly simple solution to the spam problem is to install Mozilla and use the spam filter in its mail reader. It works quite well, especially after a little simple training: if it misses one (false negative) or marks something spam that isn't (false positive) one mouse click corrects both the immediate problem and retrains the filter. Because spam is such a moving target, no one approach is going to. Blacklists, filters and blackhole lists are all helpful, but no one approach will do the trick. I've been a mostly happy Mailwasher user for the last several months. Here are my spam stats for this past week: Filters: 8,739 RBL lists: 2,745 Blacklist: 1,524 My mail has been consistently 90% spam. Although Mailwasher either flags or deletes the mail from the server before I download it, there is still always the risk of false positives. I had Mailwasher delete spam without my intervention for about a week, but discovered I was losing legitimate mail. For me, that's the real outrage about spam. Joe Parsons |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 20:25:32 -0800, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote:
Mozilla is user-trainable, so the moving target isn't a problem. When it misses one, you just mark it as spam, Mozilla gets retrained a little, and it gets dropped in the Junk folder. Sure--but if you have to be continually retraining your mail client, it kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it? My situation may be a tad different, because of the sheer volume of spam I receive (close to 1,000 a day). Filters alone won't work for me simply because so many of the spammers are developing countermesures to evade them. Ultimately, the only solution to spam is for it to be no longer profitable for the spammers--that people stop responding ot it. Joe Parsons |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
It's about 97% effective, which means I get about five false positives a day
that require one mouse click each to retrain for. That's five mouse clicks to make the rest vanish. -- Chuck Tribolet http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/people/triblet Silicon Valley: STILL the best day job in the world. "Joe Parsons" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 20:25:32 -0800, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Mozilla is user-trainable, so the moving target isn't a problem. When it misses one, you just mark it as spam, Mozilla gets retrained a little, and it gets dropped in the Junk folder. Sure--but if you have to be continually retraining your mail client, it kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it? My situation may be a tad different, because of the sheer volume of spam I receive (close to 1,000 a day). Filters alone won't work for me simply because so many of the spammers are developing countermesures to evade them. Ultimately, the only solution to spam is for it to be no longer profitable for the spammers--that people stop responding ot it. Joe Parsons |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
"Joe Parsons" wrote in message ... My situation may be a tad different, because of the sheer volume of spam I receive (close to 1,000 a day). Filters alone won't work for me simply because so many of the spammers are developing countermesures to evade them. Try using a form mail script instead of a harvestable email address on your webpage. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 16:14:29 GMT, Joe Parsons
wrote: On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 20:25:32 -0800, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Mozilla is user-trainable, so the moving target isn't a problem. When it misses one, you just mark it as spam, Mozilla gets retrained a little, and it gets dropped in the Junk folder. Sure--but if you have to be continually retraining your mail client, it kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it? My situation may be a tad different, because of the sheer volume of spam I receive (close to 1,000 a day). Filters alone won't work for me simply because so many of the spammers are developing countermesures to evade them. Ultimately, the only solution to spam is for it to be no longer profitable for the spammers--that people stop responding ot it. Joe Parsons The problem is bigger than that, Joe. Much of the Spam that any address receives is generated by random address engines. They sit and spin 24 hours a day, sending spam-mail to every conceivable address. Additionally, if you make one mistake, email one harvestable database, you are forever "locked". The only out is to munge headers, or change your address. It sucks, but that's life. The change-able: Regards, noah To email me, remove the "OT-" from OT-wrecked.boats.noah. ....as you were. ) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
SPAMMER Blacklist
On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 04:21:46 GMT, "Joe" wrote:
"Joe Parsons" wrote in message .. . My situation may be a tad different, because of the sheer volume of spam I receive (close to 1,000 a day). Filters alone won't work for me simply because so many of the spammers are developing countermesures to evade them. Try using a form mail script instead of a harvestable email address on your webpage. I get very little spam to the address on my web page. Joe Parsons |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Biggest Usenet SPAMMER Finally Identified!!! ----- IOlRvcv4Jk | General |