Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[Barry2]

Hello Allie,

Tuesday, November 12, 2002, 11:03:19 AM, you wrote, and I heavily
snipped as we can talk about this till the cows come home :

ACM> In ,
ACM> Barry2 [B] wrote:'

B>> The difference is that the rubbish isn't sent to me at all - I
B>> consider it a complete waste of bandwidth to transfer megabytes
B>> of data onto my PC just to then dump it in the bin !!!

ACM> If it will end up saving on-line time and your time then why not?

Overall on-line time is hours per session anyway so it's not the
actual waste of time that's the issue, more the principal of keeping
the SPAM away.

B>> Time isn't the issue at all

ACM> Ok. I didn't realize this. It certainly is for me. One of the
ACM> terrible things about spam for me is that it gets in my way. If I
ACM> can keep them getting in my way at a minimum without losing
ACM> legitimate mail then I'll choose that route.

Exactly - We also are annoyed by SPAM so have chosen not to allow the
stuff into our systems at all. TB! allows us to do this very neatly :-)

There is always the other side of the fight too, i.e. Viruses and
Trojans. We all know that there are new exploits being worked on daily
and what we considered safe once is not necessarily going to stay that
way. So the secondary reason for pre-scanning the headers is to spot
suspicious looking headers etc.. a healthy dose of North of England
suspicion works wonders here < lol > Anything we are not expecting is
looked at closely - even the expected mail is checked to see if it
*rings true* - after all, just because we are careful doesn't mean
folks who might have our e-mail addresses on their systems are equally
as careful ??

I realise that many folks would take all this to be just too much
hassle and in an ideal world I'd agree, but we aren't in that ideal
world and until that day dawns ( if ever ) then we'll continue to
exercise the greatest caution with e-mail and on-line activities.

As you agree - each to their own and effectively it's a situation
where everybody is right but just do it differently. Merely outlining
our particular way of doing it :-)

We have a joke over here that may amuse ( or confuse ) but there was a
man in the middle of London who was painting his house bright yellow.
When asked why he did this he replied, "To keep the man eating Tigers
away!!". When told there wasn't any man eating Tigers for thousands of
miles from London he replied, "I know ... good stuff isn't it ??" and
carried on painting.

-- 
Best regards,
 Barry2
Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows 98 4.10 Build  



Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[Barry2]

Hello Allie,

Sunday, November 10, 2002, 5:40:56 PM, you wrote:

ACM> In ,
ACM> Barry2 [B] wrote:'

B>> I.E. Watch what you are downloading ( using the inbuilt Mail
B>> Dispatcher in TB! is for me an essential part of e-mail security
B>> ) and apply a little common sense  offers too good to miss
B>> can want to offer you more than you bargained for ( viruses ) and
B>> those funny files can have the last laugh on you !!

ACM> This sounds tedious. What's the difference between deleting them
ACM> with the dispatcher and deleting them from your mailbox.

The difference is that the rubbish isn't sent to me at all - I
consider it a complete waste of bandwidth to transfer megabytes of
data onto my PC just to then dump it in the bin !!!

ACM> Most spam mail aren't that big. The time you spend downloading
ACM> headers and examining them is probably more than the time just
ACM> downloading them and then going off-line. You can then delete them
ACM> at your leisure.

Time isn't the issue at all - sure it means scanning through the
headers but with TB!'s ability to list those by Name / Sender / Size
it isn't hard to weed out the spam from the mail that is wanted. It's
also a good first line of defense against new virus outbreaks - you
soon develop an eye for strange message headers and a group of large
files of the same size.

As an example - scanning a download of 200 mails or so takes no more
than a couple of minutes and the subsequent download time is much
shorter for the lack of the Spam !

ACM> Why not do the following.

ACM> Filter all known mail to specific folders.

It already is of course :-) Only new mail ends up in the Inbox.

ACM> Filter all unknown mail to a spam folder. This will comprise a
ACM> single filter that goes below all the others. It is to move all
ACM> messages to the spam folder. Switch the sound off for this folder as
ACM> well.

Again, just is a waste of bandwidth and to scan through such a folder
would take longer than to go through the headers in the Mail
Dispatcher ... not that it's the time angle I'm bothered about, but
surely it's more tedious to go through a whole folder full of Spam
just to weed out what you'd pick up in a matter of seconds before you
downloaded ??

I guess everyone has their own way of using TB! - and for me that is
one of its great strengths - but I can assure you that pre-scanning
the headers first isn't tedious in the slightest - on a dial-up
connection it can be more tedious just watching all that rubbish come
down the phone line < lol >

Each to their own - but the original question was about how to
efficiently fight Spam  the way we do it here there is ZERO spam
on our systems and the only mail we get is the mail we *want* to get.
As a Spam / Virus fighting methodology that takes some beating < lol >

NB - just in case .. we also run up to date AV and Firewall too :-)

-- 
Best regards,
 Barry2
Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows 98 4.10 Build  



Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[DG Raftery Sr.]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Monday, November 11, 2002
9:13:43 PM
RE: "how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!"

Greetings Simon,

On Sunday, November 10, 2002, 7:28:37 AM, you wrote:

S> I  use a program called Mailwasher. It sits between my mailserver and TB! OT
S> has custom filtering capabilites, blacklists, friends lists, etc. and plenty
S> of really useful features.

Good little program and I looked at it myself some time ago. To bad
even the new beta does not support IMAP which is the connection type
used here on 4 of my 5 accounts.

If you use POP3 or APOP it's worth it's price .

- --
Regards,
 DG Raftery Sr.

Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will use it.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP for Business Security 6.0

iQA/AwUBPdBklWGmTEg4iItaEQKJewCffjkeLDPgorbJkgHz3UYUhXi1DQgAnRsh
GMFCc8eeKd9sZsiTxVOFn1WN
=mUrv
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[Scott Johnson]

John,

JDH> Others swear by their favorite programs, however, and that's fine.


As I said...not trying to offend.  Just offering my 2 cents worth.  ;)
 It's what works best for me and possibly some others here.

-- 
Scott

Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 Build  2600
Service Pack 1



Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[Scott Johnson]

To all reading this thread,

ACM> Why not do the following.

ACM> Filter all known mail to specific folders.

ACM> Filter all unknown mail to a spam folder. This will comprise a
ACM> single filter that goes below all the others. It is to move all
ACM> messages to the spam folder. Switch the sound off for this folder as
ACM> well.

Ok... I can't resist chiming in.  There has been alot of talk about
spam recently in here and I'll offer what MY sollution to it is.  I
use SpamWeasel.  It's a free download from http://www.mailgate.com
I'm sure there are other programs that would work equally as well but
this is the one I chose that met MY needs the best.

This is not directed at anyone in particular.  I'm just airing my
opinion.  Don't anyone get their hackles up.  ;)

A few people keep saying how wonderful it is to sort their spam to a
different folder.  While this is a neat feature of TB! that can be used
for some things, I feel it is NOT intended to sort spam.  Who really
wants to look at the stuff even once?  Install SpamWeasel and you can
have the spam deleted before you even see it.

In all fairness, I haven't completely done away with spam in my inbox.
 I err on the side of safety and let some through.  It has 5 priority
 levels for filters and can take different actions for each priority.
  It can be a bear to get it setup to your liking, but once there it's
  a no brainer to use.  Completely transparent to the user.  In my
  highest priority level it ignores people in my address book and
  newsletters and such.  Those mails just slide right on in.  I
  gradually tighten security at each lower
  level till I'm deleting anything that would be 99% likely to be
  spam.  One level in the middle adds "-SPAM-" to the subject
  line of the message and allows it through.  The second lowest level
  sends the message to an archive which I check on a weekly basis just
  to be sure there are no foulups.

  As I said, it can be a pain to setup.  I had to create a couple of
  filter rules myself, but I'm no rocket scientist and did it just by
  looking in the other rule files and following the examples there.
  Do a little cutting and pasting, add a couple tweaks, and you have a
  new rule it can sort on.  I haven't done much with TB! filters but I
  imagine it's quite similar in many respects.

  I spent one evening setting SpamWeasel up on my system.  I made a
  few errors in judgment (setting the wrong priority for a filter...)
  that needed to be fixed in the next few nights, but since then it
  has been very low maintenance.  It simply works.  Just add a new
  friend's email to it's list now and then.

  I do not work for nor am I being paid by Mailgate.  I just like a
  program that does what it is advertised to do.  That's why we all
  run an E-mail client with such a low market share isn't it? It
  works!

  

  I can see where it might be advantageous to keep having TB! sort your
  mail, but I personally would do it AFTER 80-90% of the spam has been
  weeded out and deleted.  Just my opinion.


-- 
Scott

Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 Build  2600
Service Pack 1



Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[Mitch Wagner]

Adam Bradley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said on Sunday, November 10, 2002, 7:32:08 AM

> Sunday, November 10, 2002, 2:25:35 AM, Mitch wrote:

>> It's not just for filtering spam - you can filter your e-mail on
>> ANYTHING. I've been playing with it a couple of hours, and I've got it
>> set up to take over all my e-mail filtering. Seems to be working out
>> pretty well - it already knows where to put my mailing list mail
>> and this is after filtering a mere 14 messages. Pretty impressive.
> ...
>> I'm really very impressed with POPinfo.

> This is what sounds so great about it, the ability to recognise many
> different things about email that static filters just can't .
> The only problem with using it as a perl script, is that once you've
> set it up initially it then runs using just that batch of emails as a
> base. What it really needs is to be integrated into the mail client,
> that way when it misses something, or gets it wrong, you can tell it
> to correct it's database when you move the email to the correct
> folder.

The documentation is unclear on this point, but you CAN train it on
incoming e-mails. You go to a page marked history on the configuration
page, where you see a list of all the e-mails you've received
recently, along with a pull-down of which "bucket" they were
classified into. If you change the bucket in the pull-down, you can
train the software to recognize the correct bucket.

Mitch Wagner




Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[Mitch Wagner]

Adam Bradley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said on Saturday, November 9, 2002, 6:01:24 
PM

> Saturday, November 9, 2002, 8:52:35 PM, rick wrote:

>> after 2 days it is working quite well. It uses probability instead of
>> static filters. Works wonderful so far.

> Are you just using it to filter spam? I was interested in replacing
> all my bat rules with this, but I don't know how well it would work.
> Given that my current filters get 90% of my spam anyway, I'm not sure
> it's worth it.

POPinfo doesn't replace your The Bat filters; it complements them.
POPinfo adds a special header to your e-mail to designate the type of
e-mail, you set up your filters to sort e-mail based on that header.

It's not just for filtering spam - you can filter your e-mail on
ANYTHING. I've been playing with it a couple of hours, and I've got it
set up to take over all my e-mail filtering. Seems to be working out
pretty well - it already knows where to put my mailing list mail
and this is after filtering a mere 14 messages. Pretty impressive.

Of course, you don't need fancy-shmancy Bayesian statistical analysis
just to filter out mailing lists. And, as you say, there's existing
technology that already does a good job of filtering out spam.

The REAL question for me is, can I teach it to separate high-priority
legitimate e-mail from less important e-mail which is still
legitimate? I'm a technology journalist - can I teach POPfilter to
separate the big announcements from big companies from the minor
announcements? (I can't just tell it to flag all e-mail from Microsoft
and Sun as important - sometimes those guys make minor announcements.)
Can I teach it to flag e-mail from my friends, family and co-workers
as important, unless they're just forwarding jokes?

I'm really very impressed with POPinfo.


Mitch Wagner
Technology Journalism and Consulting
Resumé and clips www.mitchwagner.com
+1 (619) 461-4316




Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[rick]

Hello Adam,

Saturday, November 9, 2002, 9:01:24 PM, you wrote:

AB> Saturday, November 9, 2002, 8:52:35 PM, rick wrote:

>> after 2 days it is working quite well. It uses probability instead of
>> static filters. Works wonderful so far.

AB> Are you just using it to filter spam? I was interested in replacing
AB> all my bat rules with this, but I don't know how well it would work.
AB> Given that my current filters get 90% of my spam anyway, I'm not sure
AB> it's worth it.

I have replaced all my bat rules and now have three rules. POPFile
adds a line of text at end of header like this X-Text-Classification:personal

I then have the three rules. One rule catches the personal, one
catches the spam and one catches thebatlist.  In two days I am very
impressed. Remember you have to train it.  You set it up and then when
you get emails you classify them for POPfile. In doing this for one
day I have achieved over 95%.  Before I rebooted, I had processed 122
messages. POPFile recorded 99.22% accuracy. However, this accuracy
started after the 100th email therefore 21 out of 22 were process
correctly after just 1 day of use.

What really impressed me with POPFile is that it correctly put my
officemax.com (officemax.com emails are very similar in nature to
spam) emails in my personal folder while stopping similar
spam messages.  It did this after training.

I am very happy with it.


-- 
Best regards,
 rick



Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: how to efficiently fight against spam with the bat!

[Mitch Wagner]

rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said on Saturday, November 9, 2002, 12:52:35 PM

> Hello Claude,

> Saturday, November 9, 2002, 3:10:06 PM, you wrote:



CR>> Hi,


CR>> Could someone tell me what antispam software (or
CR>> solution) which workvery well with the bat!, a solution to fight against
CR>> spam and attachment with viruses.

> I am currently using POPfile which is an open source program. However,
> it is not for the initiate. URL is http://popfile.sourceforge.net/
> A new windows32 binary was just released 2 days ago. If you do use
> this then I recommend you do the following:

> 1. read manual/go to forums and read post for absolute beginners
> 2. download perl.exe for windows
> 3. download popfile
> 4. use run popfile.pl
> 5. then type this in internet explorer http://127.0.0.1:8080 and this
>will give you a GUI to configure the POPFile.
> 6. configure TheBat! to work with POPFile by following instructions in
>the manual
> 7. configure and then start classifying your emails.

>  I have found that the GUI configuration works much better than the
>  command line.
 
> after 2 days it is working quite well. It uses probability instead of
> static filters. Works wonderful so far.

Wow, how exciting! I read the essay on using Bayesian filtering to
classify spam a couple of months ago, and I'm pleased to see someone
implementing it this quickly.

Currently, I'm using the free program SpamPal

http://spampal.org.uk/

along with a few simple text filters in The Bat! - it's quite
effective.

Mitch Wagner




Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html