In message <[log in to unmask]>, at 13:18:13 on
Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Jethro R Binks <[log in to unmask]> writes
>On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> > "simple" being the key word there. If spam detection could be done with
>> > simple rules, there wouldn't be a spam issue in the first place. So the
>> > simple rules are likely to cause more harm than good.
>>
>> Not at all, the simple rules can eradicate the majority very quickly.
>>
>> For example, of someone sends an email to [log in to unmask]
>>
>> ... then I immediately classify it as Spam, because there's no-one of that
>> name here. [A real example, received today].
>
>Why did your mail system accept a mail for an address that didn't exist in
>the first place, for you to have to go on and (manually?) classify it as
>spam?
Because the emails are re-written by the people hosting that domain into
a form that makes it very difficult for my email client (which is by
then pulling them down by POP3) to reliably reconstruct the SMTP
envelope and reject unrecognised local parts. Yes, I should change where
it's hosted to somewhere more sophisticated.
--
Roland Perry
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|