There's this myth that automated spam detection is hard because spammers are all very clever masters of disguise.
-
There's this myth that automated spam detection is hard because spammers are all very clever masters of disguise.
No. Spammers are stupid as a shoe. They have dog shit for brains.
Automated spam detection is hard because the line between spam and "legitimate" marketing activity is a fiction.
@danslimmon @ielenia ah you see .. just block all "legitimate" marketing activity too
-
@jrdepriest @azonenberg @danslimmon not my experience.
Over the last 4 weeks I rejected 16.3% of emails.
Of that 1.9% were replied 4.7.1 (try again later) and 0.4% were replied 5.7.1 (spam) and ended up in my spam folders to review.On the other hand 13.4% lacked a reverse hostname. The great majority of those were from China (.cn). Only one was from a (UK) site I have bought from.
@marjolica howdy, how’s it going with you ?
-
@danslimmon I personally find that greylisting + greytrapping removes the obvious ones, and saves a lot of electricity plus wear and tear on the poor servers doing content and header filtering.
My greytrapping and misc retrospective is hopefully useful to others too: Eighteen Years of Greytrapping - Is the Weirdness Finally Paying Off? https://nxdomain.no/~peter/eighteen_years_of_greytrapping.html - with references at the end.
@pitrh hello, how’s it going with you ?
-
A number of times, at a number of different organizations, I've asked *my employer* (and their partners) to please do a better job with their email requests for action so as *NOT* to "check off" a number of issues in their emails that are literally in their own required computer security training.
@JeffGrigg
This. The problem is not with distinguishing spam from "marketing activity", but that the line between spam and ANY business email activity is rapidly moving closer to fiction.
@danslimmon -
S simonjust@mstdn.dk shared this topic
