On Wednesday 30 June 2004 15.54, Robert Cates wrote:
> Hi,
>
> why don't you make life easier for yourself and forget trying to
> block Spam! Let your customers and/or users be responsible for
> blocking Spam! [...]
Apart from what Russel says: are you prepared to pay for it?
According to some (IIRC AOL published numbers like that) email blocked
in the SMTP transaction reaches 80-90% of the mail delivery attempts in
some cases (I have ca. 50%, I guess mainly because my domain is
insignificant enough not to attract systematic dictionary attacks etc.)
So, are you prepared to pay for
- the additional storage used to store all the mail
- the additional support personnel to answer phones when customers are
annoyed that their mail quota is full again
- the additional bandwidth used to transfer all that spam to the
customers
- the additional time spent by all customers (instead of just once by
the ISP) to configure an anti-spam set up that will in 80% of the cases
filter out all of the same messages for everybody
(not to mention that such a set up has less information available, like
crossassassin-style detection of the same message being delivered to
many accounts, which is quite a good spam-sign in many cases).
Lacking experience with large set ups, this is not hard data, but I'm
quite confident that those who *have* experience with large set ups can
confirm these thoughts.
I agree that false positives are extremely annoying, so an ISP/corporate
anti-spam policy will have to be more conservative than what some here
use for their own email.
cheers
-- vbi
--
Beware of the FUD - know your enemies. This week
* The Alexis de Toqueville Institue *
http://fortytwo.ch/opinion/
Attachment:
pgpXqcbJTdrHb.pgp
Description: signature