On 30/12/04 07:12 -1000, Peter Kay wrote:
I've been a part of this list for some time now, in mostly lurking fashion.
My question to the group is, if you read all the anti-spam vendors (me
included), they all claim high-9 catch rates and near-zero false positives.
Let me see vendors successfully handling abuse desk mailboxes, or
mailboxes for sales, abuse, postmaster, and helpdesk at the edge MTA.
I am not really interested in per recipient mail filtering as much as
trying to make sure it doesn't get sent out in the first place.
If this is the case, why are we still here trying to eliminate spam when one
would think that, if the claims are true, the spam problem has been solved?
I can only think of one of three reasons:
1. The vendor claims are false. In the real world, you still get lots of
undesireable email.
2. The vendor claims are true, but we're a bunch of perfectionists searching
for infinite resolution of Pi.
3. The filtering paradigm is a non-solution due to increased use of
recipient resources (bandwith, storage, processing, end-user time, etc)
I'm jaded here because I just don't get any spam at all. To me, this group
is firmly stuck in #2. But I'd love to hear everyone's feedback/experience
on "Why are we still here?"
#3 for me. In the opinions of the people that I know of here who are
handling significatint amounts of mail not destined for their own inbox,
that seems to be true too.
Devdas Bhagat
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg