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

Re: [OT] SpamCop.net



> SpamCop is a rather arbitrarily-run service that has received a lot of
> criticism for blocking whole IP ranges, thereby blocking tons of legit
> mail in the name of blocking a spammer or two who might also inhabit
> that IP range. In particular, journalist Declan McCullagh's PoliTech
> mailing list has been blocked at times by SpamCop; there is information
> about this in the PoliTech archives. I would not recommend SpamCop to
> anyone.

I use SpamCop all the time (30 times a day + ) as a header analyzing engine.
It does a great job of tracking the message source.  Saves me hours every day 
so I don't have to manually track down the message source and upstream ISP.  
I then forward the actual spam to the ISP from which it came.  Sometimes I 
wonder if I am wasting my time by doing my "little" duty to make the Internet 
better.  Am I ??    It seems to me, and I could be very wrong, that there 
needs to be some major fundamental changes in the way smtp is handled.
Spam is getting worse every single freaking day with no end in sight at all !!

> Debian contains a number of programs to help you block spam yourself.
> SpamAssassin works pretty well out of the box; I prefer bogofilter,
> which works quite well indeed but requires some training before it
> becomes very effective (it's based on Bayesian statistical analysis; you
> show it a large number of spam mails, and another large pile of non-spam
> mails, and over time, as it sees more of your mail, it gets better and
> better at figuring out what you consider to be "spam").

That is good stuff to know but I still believe spam needs to be reported to 
the source network.  If the ISP's don't know how they are being used by the 
spammers then how can they help stop the SPAM?  Of course there will always 
be completely irresponsible and disgusting ISP's out there like Bellsouth.net 
which seem to promote and harbor spammers.  You can't do anything about them.

Andy



Reply to: