From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 22 09:48:23 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0FA16A4C1 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 09:48:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vhost109.his.com (vhost109.his.com [216.194.225.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5107D44015 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 09:48:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brad.knowles@skynet.be) Received: from [10.0.1.2] (localhost.his.com [127.0.0.1]) by vhost109.his.com (8.12.6p3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h8MGm3UQ055798; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 12:48:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from brad.knowles@skynet.be) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: bs663385@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20030922121327.R335@www.bluecirclesoft.com> References: <20030922104213.L335@www.bluecirclesoft.com> <28213.216.195.235.103.1064243311.squirrel@webmail.gigguardian.com > <20030922121327.R335@www.bluecirclesoft.com> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:43:51 +0200 To: Marc Ramirez From: Brad Knowles Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" cc: Chip McClure cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What are people using for MUA's nowadays? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:48:23 -0000 At 12:22 PM -0400 2003/09/22, Marc Ramirez wrote: > I'm probably most interested in setting up a Bayesian filter for now. Bayesian filters are one piece of the package, but should not be used alone. For one thing, they need input of several hundred (preferably several thousand) recent spam/ham messages, so that they can be trained on what your particular mail traffic looks like. If you can't give them that amount of input data, then they're not very useful. In my experience, you're better off starting with a rules-based scoring filtering system where things have been pre-assigned certain weights, such as SpamAssassin. In here, you put all your black lists, and everything else you can (black lists just become another input to the score, helping to raise or lower the chance that the message will be recognized as spam). You can add to this a Bayesian-style learning/adaptive filtering system, and you should look closely at various options, including the Bayesian mode of SpamAssassin, or crm114 (which claims to get better performance than SpamAssassin on smaller sample sets), and I'm sure there are many others. To this picture, you should also add greylisting and a message-digest validation mechanism such as DCC, Razor, or Pyzor (I'd use at least DCC plus one other, and not just one of the three). Then you also need to incorporate anti-virus scanning. I'm seeing more than two-thirds of my traffic right now being nothing but w32.swen.a@mm virus crap. > Anyways, thank you very much for your input. I'm gonna look at > SquirrelMail, too (for different reasons). For webmail solutions, I recommend TWIG. It's PHP-based, but doesn't make nearly so much use of Javascript as Horde/IMP, and it seemed to work better for us than SquirrelMail at the large Belgian ISP that I used to work for. -- Brad Knowles, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)