Actually false positives are a potential that has to be acknowledge with
a viable solution. My personal suggestion is a system similar to Hotmail's
where not otherwise specified potential SPAM is routed to a sub-mailbox that
is automatically purged periodically (user's choice would be best with say a
once a week default). This would also be complimented by a White List of
SPAM like messages that the user specifically wants to receive. That way
the user gets all of his/her mail unless the specifically block a given
source, without having potential spam routed to their inbox. That way the
service provider can not be accused of blocking any legitimate Email. If
the customer does not get a message it is not because of any action on the
service providers part. If an inbound message is not delivered per the
senders addressing it is likewise not the providers fault.
As a scenario you have to realize that many list do generate high
volumes of email that your users may wish to receive. It is often labeled
as "bulk" email and some filter settings will have issue with this. Maybe
it's spam and maybe not, I think it is best when you let the user
determines that. It get the service provider out of the loop and lets the
user determine what they do or do not wish to receive.
Virus scanning is an entirely different affair and from what I've seen
in this forum so far, Declude system seem to provide the optimum answer.
Kevin Childers
,,,,,
����}
~'
Customer Support Desk
(910) 486-7845 / (888) 228-0312
Fayetteville Internet Communications
APCNet - FayNet - NetQuick - QuickWAN
The Carolinas' Fastest Internet Communications Provider
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael E. Middleton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 11:54 AM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] rules.ima
> > altered a bit. Suppose the legitimate subscribers are receiving an
> > investment newsletter about their portfolio. Suppose the unhappy
> > subscriber
> > gets a pump-and-dump spam and complains, then suppose that your new rule
> > somehow blocks the legitimate investment news letter because they appear
> > identical. Next day, the legitimate newsletter advises it's subscribers
to
> > drop Enron just in time for them to save millions... but they
> > never get that
> > newsletter.
>
> Well, UCE is UCE... and it's not a "gray area". The problem you've raised
> is false-positives...
>
> Here's what we do:
> 1. All inbound items go first to our EmailScrub server where they are
> checked for viruses and trojans. Positives are bounced back to the sender
> with a notice to the intended recipient... virus-free email is passed on.
> 2. Next they are 'razor'ed by spamassassin... and given a numeric score.
> Clearly 0 is clean, 25 is spam. We currently add {SPAM?} to the subject
line
> of any that score 6.6 or higher. Members of this forum may benefit from
> looking at spamassassin and the tests they run and values assigned.
> 3. All items are passed to Imail where individual customers or IT guys for
> larger sites maintain rules.ima. We recommend the use of TRASH folders.
>
> What I'd like to do is participate in a forum to share ideas for tuning
> rules.ima. I'm not worried about Spammers sueing me or about my customers
> not getting important investment newsletters because we don't delete Email
> and our customers maintain their own rules.ima (with our help).
>
> But you have me wondering if someone tried to send me an Email notice to
> sell Cisco when it was $54 and I didn't get it and if I could find out who
> deleted that Email I can sue them for the $30 grand I've lost.
>
> Mike
>
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
>
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
