 |
techjoe
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Schererville, IN
| 'cuda We run a few barracuda units at work (300/400 series) and we block at least 90% of all incoming mail right at those units. Our average bounces in the mid 200,000 blocked range with under 10,000 delivered usually per day. The kicker -- This is for 1,500 users. If the average was realistic (which it isn't for various reasons) our users would have about 133 spam each per day coming at them.
In fact, I got curious and opened my nightly report from our primary 'cuda 400 and sure enough, 211k received yesterday and just shy of 11k actually sent onto the exchange server (technically the second filter, but that one rarely has a chance to pick things off).
With all of that said: I felt a bit silly reading their "report". I felt like they wanted me to buy yet another unit when I was almost done reading it...It was more of a press release than a report, IMHO. If their product sucked I'd really be rolling my eyes, but I guess in all it wasn't too bad, but the "report" I can generate from a barracuda unit was much more informative than the one they wrote up. 
Spam's surely on the rise, and it's just like telemarketing calls and the pile of crap I throw away on a weekly basis from my snail mail box. All of that grew and grew, at least until some real controls were put into place. IMHO, SPF or another related system will be the key to bringing down general traffic, but adoption is the problem. Convince everyone to invest time, money, labor, risk, and everything else to adopt what XYZ says is the "new" standard, including systems residing outside the typical reach of the latest and greatest technology. I'm not holding my breath, personally...
Too bad Barracuda doesn't make a mailbox I can mount at the end of my driveway that will toss the 99% of the snail mail that I have to manually filter....I literally actually open less than 1% of what comes, as sad as it is. 
--
www.clanc.cc | |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK |  Another reason pay by byte should never be allowed
| |
|
 | robertfl
Premium
join:2005-10-10
Mary Esther, FL | Re: Another reason pay by byte should never be allowed and don't forget pcs just like yours are sending this stuff, too why Windows needs to be better patched to fix the zombie isums that a lot of computers these days are facing and people don't even know it.
-Rob | |
|
Joseph327
join:2006-02-03
Jacksonville, FL
1 edit | Holy Cow 95% ??? When I had DSL I used to get tons of it! Since the switch to Comcast, zero!  | |
|
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs: | Mmmmmm spam
| |
|
MrBradTX
join:2001-05-23
Carrollton, TX | Spam stats from an anti-spam vendor? Aren't spam stats from an anti-spam vendor somewhat suspect? Sort of like a male enhancement vendor announcing that 95 percent of men are below average? | |
|
netlinker
join:2002-04-20
Switzerland
| ISPs could do much more to combat Spam We have been running the open source software ASSP on two Exchange Mailservers for just over a year now. All spam mails and viruses are already rejected at the SMTP level. Reject levels are 92.4% on one server and 80.6% on the other server. I consider the spam problem solved. Why can't ISPs provide a similar level of service? My ISP for example (pair) are still letting through a lot of spam that my ASSP setup at the office handles with ease. | |
|
burgerwars
join:2004-09-11
Northridge, CA | The Battle May Never Be Won As spam filters get better and better, spammers must then send out proportionately more spam to achieve the same number of messages that will get through to people's mailboxes. | |
|
|
WindsorGirl
join:2006-11-26
Windsor, ON | Re: I rarely get spam on Gmail True I don't neither. It would be the perfect email if only I could get all my other email through gmail as well | |
|
|
|
|
·
Are there any free programs to sort out spam for Outlook E?