[linux-elitists] (tmda) Re: Constraining Bogus challenges.
Larry M. Augustin
Tue Sep 23 14:54:52 PDT 2003
Quoting Rick Moen:
> Quoting Matt Beland (firstname.lastname@example.org):
> > So, you actually haven't done jack to evaluate content-filtering
> > systems, because if you had you'd know that your statement is
> > blatently false. You just want to be a happily anti-social little
> > prick and put the burden on other people to prove that they're worthy
> > of communicating with you. If you whiney little pricks want to wall
> > yourself off from the rest of the Internet, go right ahead. Spend all
> > your time trading C-R requests and congratulating yourselves on how
> > smart you are. May you get all you deserve.
> > Just keep your shit off my servers.
I have discussed spam hit rate statistics for a wide variety of approaches
and algorithms with virtually every commercial anti-spam provider out there
as part of a study of the anti-spam market we did at Azure Capital. I can't
share specifics by company, but I can tell you that if any of them truly got
98% accuracy with no false positives they would be ecstatic.
Further, I personally run SpamAssassin and Exim4 on Debian. I use the Bayes
filtering. The results are good, but not yet 98%. Marc Merlin's exim4
configs (thanks Marc) help a lot.
I am not advocating C-R. I am simply challenging the idea that blocking 98%
of spam is that easy. I think it's very, very hard. As a result, I have
some sympathy for the C-R advocates. If it were that easy to block 98% of
spam *for everyone*, I think you would see less adoption of C-R systems.
So let's all work together to make anti-spam filtering techniques work
better, then the C-R people will have no legs to stand on.
More information about the linux-elitists