[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Using procmail to deal with backscatter spam



On Fri Oct 10, 2008 at 17:17:49 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:

> Well, defining that something coming from another language and encoding
> that you don't understand can works for YOU, but not for everybody... We
> have quite some Asian customers, they wouldn't be happy with these kinds
> of rules!

  Indeed, which is why I listed it as an extra.  But the original
 thread, located elsewhere, specifically asked about blocking foreign
 spam.

> Also, the charset used in the mail doesn't tell you FOR SURE
> what kind of language is used in the content of the email. I can write
> you a mail using the Chinese charset, but with the content in English,
> and you would be 100% capable of reading it.

  True.

> Even more important: it makes no sense at all. Why a mail within an
> Asian charset would be more a spam than another? Do not take it badly,
> it's not aimed to you, but I consider this fascism... :) Just consider
> how many people on the internet are from Asia, and you will agree.

  In general you're correct.  The location, language, and character
 set shouldn't have any bearing.  That said I receive several thousand
 spam messages a day.  The majority of it is in English coming from the
 USA and UK.  The next significant common thing is Asian & Russian 
 character sets.

  Given that I'm a personal individual who rarely deals with Asian
 and Russian email I've not heard this has caused any problem.  I
 clearly cannot block English messages as that is what my legitimate
 mail would be written in.

> Last: don't you think there are more efficient ways of filtering?

  I look forward to hearing about your efficient solution, which
 doesn't run the risk of fascistly blocking large swathes of messages
 that somebody else might consider valid ..

  Actually I think my own service is pretty good, but that's more for
 small businesses and people with their own domains:

    http://mail-scanning.com/

Steve
-- 


Reply to: