Re: Legal position selling a Sky Plus box


"Aidan Karley" <name1_name2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:VA.00001481.0f352495@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <fb9hpi$6ci$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Bob Lucas wrote:
Consequently, the use of a "noreply" or "nospam" prefix will not
protect
against spam.

On it's own, you're correct, but use of simple mail rules at the
receiving end can do a lot. Filtering on the headers and throwing away
all
mail addressed to "noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxx" does do some good.
Alternatively,
throw away all mail not addressed to john@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
george@xxxxxxxxxxxx or ringo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
The proportion of internet users who can understand and
implement
mail filtering is another issue.

--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland
Written at Sun, 02 Sep 2007 15:40 +0100, but posted later.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0


I agree that mail filtering can help to address the problem - once your
email address has fallen into the hands of multiple spammers.

I used filtering with my previous Freeserve account and yes, the filters
did prevent Outlook Express from downloading too much SPAM. However, I
did not feel sufficiently confident to set the message rules to delete
all suspect junk mail upon receipt, because Freeserve tagged some
genuine messages incorrectly as SPAM. Consequently, I still needed to
log onto Freeserve from time to time (via their webmail facility), to
delete accumulated SPAM and rescue the occasional message that had been
tagged incorrectly.

The Freeserve junk mail filter was not totally efficient. They did tag
approximately 90% of junk mail as SPAM (which prevented me from
downloading these messages to my computer). However, the remaining 10%
still found its way to my inbox.

The problem escalated to the extent that I was receiving 200+ unwanted
messages daily. Eventually, I had no alternative but to abandon my
Freeserve mail account.

Prevention is always better than cure. Even if you quote your email
address in newsgroups as noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx or
nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, you still run the risk of needing to reject
massive volumes of SPAM, if you use Freeserve, Fsnet, Orange or a
similar organisation as your mail domain.

Filters to prevent messages from reaching your inbox will help - but I
still believe it is better to quote a totally fictitious address from
the outset on newsgroups.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Question On Spam and Exchange 2003.
    ... Why would a Spam filtering tool block a valid NDR message? ... disruptive (recipients need to inform all contacts.... ... The users receiving the messages are valid users in the Domain. ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)
  • MSF antispam info
    ... Spam and fraudulent e-mail messages are major issues for computer users ... Exchange Server, and Microsoft Exchange Hosted Filtering. ... and personalized spam protection while reducing false positives. ...
    (comp.mail.misc)
  • Re: Question On Spam and Exchange 2003.
    ... The users receiving the messages are valid users in the Domain. ... So in effect if the initial receiving Domain does NOT use SenderID, ... Spam filter is not catching these messages, the users may actually be forced ... Recipient Filtering and drop messages for recipients that don't exist in AD ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.admin)
  • Re: Non English Spam
    ... Subject: Non English Spam ... Also this means that later filtering on the first Received field is ... repeatedly blocks yahoomail, craigslist, and ebay because spammers ... If they want to filter Asian charsets, ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: IP ranges used in North America, Hawaii, and Alaska?
    ... >> If you are trying to cut down on spam, ... > *Filtering* all that crap would cost a lot more. ... > That trick became useless when lists of dynamically-assigned ... The larger the network -- and presumably the more likely employees will ...
    (comp.os.linux.security)
Loading