Re: Brightmail

2004-12-02 Thread jdow
I enabled it. And as noted it seemed remarkably ineffective, particularly as compared to SpamAssassin. I typically get 200 to 225 spams a day. Of this a few get through with SpamAssassin because I do not use SURBL. So about 3 or 4 a day sneak through. (It would be more without my custom jd_mangy_mo

Re: Brightmail

2004-12-01 Thread Matt Kettler
At 06:06 PM 12/1/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I think Earthlink uses Brightmail. If that is so then Brightmail >statistics are VERY bad. I doubt I had any false alarms - lost email. >But it only got about 75% or less of the spam. I used it while on the >road the last two weeks. I might comment t

Re: Brightmail

2004-12-01 Thread multimedia-fan
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:37:53 -0800, "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I think Earthlink uses Brightmail. If that is so then Brightmail >statistics are VERY bad. I doubt I had any false alarms - lost email. >But it only got about 75% or less of the spam. I used it while on the >road the last two w

RE: Brightmail

2004-12-01 Thread Gray, Richard
Thanks everyone for your useful and informative input. We are currently re-evaluating our email services and your feedback has been a great help. Richard --- This email from dns has been validated by dnsMSS Managed Email Security and is free from

Re: Brightmail

2004-12-01 Thread jdow
I think Earthlink uses Brightmail. If that is so then Brightmail statistics are VERY bad. I doubt I had any false alarms - lost email. But it only got about 75% or less of the spam. I used it while on the road the last two weeks. I might comment that I was very unimpressed. {^_^} - Original Me

Re: Brightmail (really, SA performance statistics)

2004-11-30 Thread Robert LeBlanc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Kettler wrote: | At 03:39 PM 11/30/2004, Bob Amen wrote: | |> Thank you for that very well written and helpful explanation! Now, |> do you have a script that computes the test values from a SA log file |> that you'd care to share? | | | You can

Re: Brightmail (really, SA performance statistics)

2004-11-30 Thread Matt Kettler
At 03:39 PM 11/30/2004, Bob Amen wrote: Thank you for that very well written and helpful explanation! Now, do you have a script that computes the test values from a SA log file that you'd care to share? You can't measure any of those performance metrics from logfiles alone.. there's no way t

Re: Brightmail (really, SA performance statistics)

2004-11-30 Thread Bob Amen
Bob Amen wrote: Robert LeBlanc wrote: The closest thing to a "standard" way of measuring a spam filter's effectiveness is the scientific model that medical researchers use for diagnostic tests. Even so, there are five separate tests, not just one: Thank you for that very well written and helpf

Re: Brightmail (really, SA performance statistics)

2004-11-30 Thread Bob Amen
Robert LeBlanc wrote: The closest thing to a "standard" way of measuring a spam filter's effectiveness is the scientific model that medical researchers use for diagnostic tests. Even so, there are five separate tests, not just one: Thank you for that very well written and helpful explanation! N

Re: Brightmail

2004-11-30 Thread Robert LeBlanc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gray, Richard wrote: | Can anyone shed any light on how Brightmail achieves the rather | impressive statistics it is quoting, or do you think it is just smoke | and mirrors? The first thing to note about performance statistics with regard to a spam filt

RE: Brightmail

2004-11-30 Thread David Birnbaum
Oddly enough, we went up head-to-head with our SpamAssassin solution against Brightmail three times in a row and won the customer every time. This is running 2.64. We have a single 8-way 3500, but we'll probably be upgrading that soon. David. - On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Damian Mendoza wrote: We

RE: Brightmail

2004-11-30 Thread Damian Mendoza
We sell BrightMail to customers that want a "Commercial" antispam solution and have deep pockets to pay a yearly subscription. We build SA based solutions (http://www.spamgate.us) for customers that want a "low-cost" antispam solution.       Regards,   Damian From: Gray, Richard [mailto:[E

Re: Brightmail

2004-11-30 Thread jay
Richard, my day job is tech support for Sun mail systems. I support the integration with both SpamAssassin and Brightmail. Both do a very good job. Brightmail is commercial software, and is sold with a contract that automatically updates it, often. Many customers are more comfortable with thi

Re: Brightmail

2004-11-30 Thread Matt Kettler
At 11:58 AM 11/30/2004, Gray, Richard wrote: Brightmail seems to be getting a lot of good press on the SPAM front. So I'm wondering, why do people running large mail systems choose SA over corporate offerings. Is it cost? Is it configurability, or performance? Can anyone shed any light on how Bri