Miss Betsy Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Miss Betsy The big advantage of blocklists that reject at the server level with a code message is that the sender gets a bounce message saying that hir email didn't go thru and why. Any other sort of filtering does not tell the sender why hir email didn't make it. depauw Personally my system handles enough traffic without having to increase my bandwidth useage to include telling people I deleted there junk becouse it was spam. http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=140&st=0 is a better answer than I can give on the costs of spam. The way I understand it is that if you reject it at the server, it doesn't cost as much as accepting it and determining if it is spam. However, my ISP said that it would cost them too much to upgrade the servers that connect to the internet to reject there. Since I am not a server admin, I really can't comment on whether it is really cost effective to reject spam rather than accept it and then delete it. Like you said the return addresses are usually spoofed or inocent servers misconfigured to relay. Yes, it is really, really bad to send an email to the return path of a spam because they are usually forged. Unfortunately, if you accept the spam, then you have to parse it the way spamcop does to find out if it is an "innocent" (I prefer incompetent though people do make mistakes so that may be unfair) proxy or relay. IME, most people who are the unwitting cause of causing other people inconvenience are usually most grateful to be told that so that they can fix it. Often people have expressed the same sentiment when they discover they have an open relay, open proxy, or compromised machine on their network thru a spamcop report. And if you have accepted the spam, it is too labor intensive (unless you use spamcop) to do that. It is sort of like being such an inattentive driver that you can't stop safely to help someone with a flat tire because you see it too late. Miss Betsy Many ISP's do have virus filtering in place. There is no need to ban attachments. Occasionally, one gets thru before the av is updated so customers need to be diligent anyway. dePauw Heh maybe I need to come live in your neck of the woods becouse I cannot name one in this state that does. Well maybe AOL but I beleive that handle that client side with the software they provide. I don't have virus filtering provided by my ISP, but I am envious of those who do. Miss Betsy Then you need additional training in how to communicate. Any person with any intelligence at all can understand that the *sender* is responsible for choosing a reliable email carrier and that, like other methods of communication, there are occasional interruptions of service. dePauw Hold the phone here. It does not matter who sends it once it reaches my server and my settings mark it as spam and it puts in a folder with 100 other spam messages and they miss a productions report it's my fault no matter how you cut the cake. Didn't you say before that you didn't want to "censor" email for someone else? If you accept spam, then of course, you are responsible for sorting it and if you miss something, it is your fault. But if you refuse to accept email from irresponsible servers, then it is not your fault. My favorite way of explaining it: If someone sent you a package by offline carrier and when it arrived, the carrier insisted that you also accept several dirty, greasy packages crawling with bugs, would you? If the sender heard about it, would he be mad at you for not accepting it? No, he would be horrified and would find another way to send the package and complain about the bad service. I can understand some businesses wanting to accept any email that comes to a sales address, for instance, or a support address so that they do not miss a customer. Then it is worth the labor to be sure that there are no false positives. But production schedules? They surely should be using a white hat server and if there is a glitch (which happens), then they should be aware that they can send it another way. Do I get all bent out of shape when computers go down at the bank or the store and I have to wait or help the clerk add my purchases up by hand? I may not be happy, but that's life and I don't stop using that store because their computer went down. dePauw My bosses hired me (a techie by education, training, experance, and sure love of it) to make that kind of decision for the company becouse they do not know or do not want to know about the subject. It's my call. Then you should tell them what the limitations of email are and what being a good netizen is. depauw You are impling that I have no way of blocking spam but to use blacklist personally I beleive we get a good 80%+ of it all spam with 100% of the real mail getting though. Which in my case is better then 99% of the spam getting caught with a 1% margin of error. As I said, I can understand that for sales and support companies. However, JHD (just hit delete) and any filters for accepted email is just automated JHD, is not going to solve the spam problem. It may make the filter developers rich. And it is slowly changing the face of the internet from the wide open spaces to gated communities. And I wonder about 100% of the real mail. I know I have deleted real emails thinking they were spam particularly if they were in the middle of a bunch of spam. Perhaps you never make a mistake, but what about those ignorant people you forward the spam to? And how do they find out that a mistake has been made? Not by a return email that alerts the sender to a problem and which he can fix easily, but when that mistake has created its own problem. This is a debate - not an attack on your personal decisions. I find the development of Internet culture fascinating and I am willing to listen to the "other" side. Miss Betsy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.