on Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 03:02:59PM -0600, Jason R. Mastaler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > "Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I stand corrected: this is a stated assumption: > > > > http://tmda.net/ > > > > 2. Content-based filters can't distinguish SPAM from legitimate mail > > with sufficient accuracy. > > > > What is the supporting basis for this statement? > > My personal experience.
Please quantify your personal experience.
As I have:
http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Rants/challenge-response.html
I might add that I myself use a mix of whitelisting and spam
filtering (via SpamAssassin) to filter my own mail with a very high
level of accuracy, in terms of true positives, true negatives, false
positives, and false negatives. Namely: better than 98% true
positive (filtered spam), less than 2% false negative (unfiltered
spam), 99.98% true negative (unfiltered non-spam), and less than
0.02% false positive (filtered non-spam). While some C-R proponents
claim filtering doesn't work, it clearly does.
Also:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2002/debian-user-200204/msg04379.html
http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/SpamEmailTrends
http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2002/4/21/141757/571/37#37
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Defeat EU Software Patents! http://swpat.ffii.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
