Scott,

What is the NOLEGITCONTENT test?

Mike

----- Original Message -----
From: "R. Scott Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:11 AM
Subject: [IMail Forum] September 2003 Spam Statistics


> Each month, we go through our spamtraps (E-mail addresses designed to
> collect spam), to find out which spam tests were most effective at
catching
> spam.  The results this month are based on over 110,000 spams that were
> received, all in September 2003.  This represents more than a 30% increase
> in spam over last month.  In September 2003 we received over 10 times as
> much spam as in September, 2002.  Although several important spam tests
> were recently forced to close by spammers, our stats show that spam can
> still be caught effectively.
>
> The following is a list of tests that we run against the E-mails arriving
> at the spamtraps, and what percentage of the spam they caught (it may be
> easier to read if you use a fixed-width font):
>
>
> WEIGHT10                 99.61%
> WEIGHT20                 97.42%
> NOLEGITCONTENT   96.41%
> SPAMMANAGER      95.50%
> SNIFFER                  94.72%
> SPAMCHK                  93.17%
> IPNOTINMX                90.25%
> XBL                      78.22%
> SPAMCOP                  75.06%
> MAILDEFLECTOR    61.37%
> EASYNET-DNSBL    55.72%
> DSBLALL                  47.88%
> DSBL                     47.19%
> BADHEADERS               46.86%
> BLARSBL                  39.82%
> FIVETENSRC               37.70%
> EASYNET-PROXIES  35.97%
> EASYNET-DYNA     34.49%
> REVDNS                   31.98%
> EXPER                    31.74%
> FREEMAIL                 31.51%
> NJABLPROXIES     31.35%
> NOPOSTMASTER     30.67%
> HELO                     29.71%
> NOABUSE                  28.83%
> ROUTING                  21.11%
> RSL                      19.61%
> SPAMHAUS                 18.85%
> BLITZEDALL               14.85%
> SPAMHEADERS      14.82%
> COMMENTS                 13.14%
> BASE64                   12.96%
> IPWHOIS                  10.60%
> DSN                       9.71%
> COMPU                     9.28%
> DELINK                    7.64%
> NJABLSOURCES      6.71%
> FABELSOURCES      5.10%
> NJABLDUL                  4.97%
> INTERSIL                  4.69%
> SPAMBAG                   4.06%
> FIVETENIGNORE     3.72%
> LNGSDUL                   3.71%
> BADWHOIS                  3.01%
> NJABL                     2.80%
> FIVETENOPTIN      2.46%
> VOX                       2.36%
> ORDB                      2.21%
> MAILFROM                  1.86%
> KUNDENSERVER      1.60%
> LNGSBLOCK                 1.03%
> PIGS                      0.85%
> DSBLMULTI                 0.68%
> DNSRBL-DUN                0.60%
> JIPPG-DUL                 0.53%
> NONENGLISH                0.53%
> DEVNULL                   0.34%
> KITHRUP                   0.29%
> FIVETENMULTI      0.07%
> FIVETENOTHER      0.02%
> DNSMAILLIST       0.01%
> JIPPG-DULJP       0.01%
>
>
> The WEIGHT10 and WEIGHT20 tests are a weighting system that assigns a
> weight to each E-mail, based on the spam tests that fail, so they don't
> really count as spam tests by themselves (but, they show that you can
catch
> as much as 97-99+% of spam with extremely few false positives).  It is
also
> important to note that different tests are more likely to produce false
> positives (such as the IPNOTINMX, XBL, REVDNS, and SPAMHEADERS tests, that
> all catch a lot of spam, but catch a lot of legitimate mail as well);
those
> tests need to be used in a weighting system, so E-mail will only be marked
> as spam if it fails a combination of tests.  The NOLEGITCONTENT and
> IPNOTINMX tests were designed to help identify legitimate E-mail (rather
> than spam), which accounts for their high percentages.
>
> It is interesting to note that at least 46% of the spam in September could
> safely be caught by the BADHEADERS test (since no RFC-compliant mail
client
> will send out E-mail that fails the BADHEADERS test).
>
> There are 3 spam tests that catch over 90% of the spam in our
> spamtraps:  SPAMMANAGER ( http://www.spammanager.com ), SNIFFER

> http://www.sortmonster.com ), and SPAMCHK
 http://www.riedmann.it/spamchk/
> ) (at its strictest setting; normally, a less strict setting would be
used,
> to minimize false positives).
>
> More information on most of the spam tests shown above can be found at
> http://www.declude.com/junkmail/support/ip4r.htm .  You can look up an IP
> address using the Spam Database Lookup tool at http://www.DNSstuff.com to
> see what spam databases it is listed in.  The most recent 20 spams in our
> spamtraps, and the tests they failed, can be found at
> http://www.declude.com/spamtrap.htm .
>
>                                                     -Scott
> ---
> Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers.
> Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver
> vulnerability detection.
> Find out what you have been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.
>
> ---
> [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
(http://www.declude.com)]
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
> Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
>
>



To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to