14 replies to this topic

[illyad]

I've read through several posts and most people seem to recommend solutions where software is installed on your computer and it filters the SPAM as it is downloaded. I am using one such package, but with the volume of mail I am getting AND the fact that the filter occurs after Norton AntiVirus scans the message, I want to find a better solution.

One of my problems is that I purchase a lot of expired domains -- many of which come with their own a flood of SPAM. Last month the mailbox where I forward all of these to had over 26,000 messages. Yes, I could just drop the mailboxes, but 1 out of every 1000 is a legitimate message that I don't want to miss.

I found one solution that seems interesting and wanted to see if anyone has had any experience with them. I am in no way affiliated with this group. It's called PrismEmail (you can guess the domain name) and they act as an intermediary. You point your email reader (eg. Outlook) at the POP3 account they create for you and then you tell them your account and password for your mailbox. They download your mail, filter it (putting the spam into a separate folder) and then you only download the clean messages.

It's not that expensive, but before I took the leap of faith (which isn't a big leap as I would not use this for any real mailboxes where I would be concerned about security), I wanted to see if anyone has had good/bad success using this type of service.

[Jill, I was so excited when I read in a newsletter recently that you had started these forums. I've been a fan of yours for quite a while]

Thanks,
- illya

[Jill]

Welcome, Illya!

I've never used a solution such as the one you mention, and I don't think I'd want to. I don't want my email going anywhere but directly to me. No spam filter is fallable, and there's a better chance, imo, that you'd lose real mail using that solution than if you do it on your own computer where you can quickly scan through your delete folder.

I still highly recommend SpamNet for that purpose.

Jill

[Mel]

Hi Ilya;
I am getting about the same amount of spam mail (no its about half that - 2748 spam mails in the past six days). I use a new program called SpamBully that does store the emails on your computer, but even though they go through the Norton AV scan and are sorted into spam and other folders, it takes me only a few moments each morning to have my mail ready to read.

I like the idea of having all the mail in the spam box, even if the program seldom makes a mistake. Spambully also reads all the spam mail and adjusts its filters to the mail you actually receive in addition to the normal lists of known spammers, topics and formats.

[Ron Carnell]

I'm in the middle of the road on this one.

I see no difference between an online solution and an offline one in terms of being able to quickly scan through the spam before it is permanently deleted. I agree that's an important feature, but it should be available in either scenario.

My problem with offline filtering is that I don't want to waste time downloading the crap. I live in the sticks, have a slow connection, and at least half of my email comes from viruses trying to send me 42K to 150K files. Ain't got time.

However, I would probably be very reluctant to introduce another potential point-of-failure by sending my email to someone else's server. What happens when they go down or fold up shop and move to Mexico? Worse, what happens when they collect the non-spam addresses and sell them to a spammer?

The vast majority of email I receive goes through one of my servers, so that's the point where I apply the filters. After the spam has been filtered, I look at the sender, subject and file size and apply an additional level of human filtering. Only then, does it come to my home machine to actually be read (and, once in a while, even answered).

[letxa2000]

Up-front I want to say that I *AM* affiliated with PrismEmail, I am one of the developers and owners of the company.

What some said about the merits of filtering at the server level as opposed to locally are all valid. I personally prefer on the server (obviously) because I don't end up downloading megabytes of spam just to filter it. This is something that is best done on the server. In just the last week PrismEmail has filtered out 64MB of Windows-style viruses that I would have otherwise had to have downloaded to have a virus filter or spam filter deal with it.

The main advantage to filtering on the server side is that there's nothing to install on the client side, you don't have to download and/or install updates on the client system thereafter, and you don't have to download the spam or viruses just to filter it. This is especially important if you're not on a broadband connection or if you are using a mail client that isn't widely supported by plug-ins, etc. It's also one less thing to install that can potentially make your Windows installation unstable (if you happen to use Windows).

Mostly what I wanted to address, however, are some privacy and security considerations that were brought up in this thread.

1. We definitely will never sell any email addresses to any spammers. We developed the service because we hate spam ourselves and would never sell email addresses. Regardless, we couldn't sell them anyway since we don't ask users to provide us with their email address, just POP3 information--but POP3 information isn't always the email address.

2. As for another point of failure, we haven't had any downtime since the service went online. In a worst case, you aren't pointing your email to us--rather, you check your PrismEmail POP3 account and we immediatelly check, download, and filter your email in real-time. So if for some reason you couldn't connect to PrismEmail you could just point your email client back to your real POP3 account and just cut PrismEmail out of the loop. Again, this is worst case and hasn't been necessary thusfar.

3. As for PrismEmail "disappearing", our company has been in business since 1993 and will be in business long after the spam problem is permanently solved. We are a privately held company with no debt or outside investors. We developed PrismEmail for our own use and realized it was something we could make available to the public. But even if no-one subscribed to PrismEmail it would continue to exist--if for nothing more than to serve our own anti-spam needs.

In any case, everyone has their opinions on server-side spam filtering. I happen to think that's where spam filtering should take place. But at the very least I wanted to address the above three points so that everyone can make a decision on the technical merits of our service rather than being bogged down in any of the above concerns.

Regards,
Craig Steiner
PrismEmail developer/owner

[Ron Carnell]

Craig, I and I'm sure other's appreciate your reassurances. Maybe for some, what you offer is their best (perhaps only) solution. I have to admit, I don't work on my own car because it's easier and cheaper to pay someone else to do it. In this case, though, I have my own "garage" already available, and I suspect most others in this forum are in a similar position.

Perhaps my point is best exemplified with a rhetorical question: Would you be entirely comfortable using your program if it was hosted on MY server?

[compar]

Perhaps my point is best exemplified with a rhetorical question: Would you be entirely comfortable using your program if it was hosted on MY server?

We'd have to know more about your server obviously. But what you seem to be arguing about is the entire .Net and Utility Computing model that apparently will be the future of computing and the Internet. If you are familiar with those models nobody will have anything on ther own machine except a browser, and all applications and services will be done on a server somewhere.

We rent Point Of Sale software to people in what is know as the ASP model of software distribution. These people have their entire corporate database and all their financial information on our server(s).

If someone is offering a good service I think the last thing to worry about is whether or not it is on your PC or server. Most people have their web sites and their entire e-Commerce businesses on somebody elses server otherwise the ISP and Hosting companies would be out of business. I can't see what would possibly be wrong with routing you email through somebody's server. It probably passes through multiple server on the way to you now.

[Ron Carnell]

You might be right, Bob. I'll be the first to admit I'm an old fart, with a lot of singed fingers from trusting the wrong people when I was younger. And not that much younger, either. I'm also a control freak. If I could buy my own phone company and eliminate their periodic snafus, I probably would. I can't do that, but I CAN install my own email filters on the server where my mail is already going anyway. Bet you could, too.

As for ASP, I'm paving the path to enter that world in the near future myself. In a minor way, of course. But being old, singed, and controlling, I'll be much more comfortable as the supplier than as the client.

[compar]

I can't do that, but I CAN install my own email filters on the server where my mail is already going anyway. Bet you could, too.

As for ASP, I'm paving the path to enter that world in the near future myself. In a minor way, of course. But being old, singed, and controlling, I'll be much more comfortable as the supplier than as the client.

As a matter of fact we do have SpamAssissin installed on our commercial email server. That way all my clients get the benifit.

As far as a filter on my own computer goes I recently downloaded the latest copy of Netscape because as I've said elsewhere I love their email client. The version 7.1 Netscape email client has a feature called "Junk mail". It is very very good and tends to catch everything that gets past SpamAssissin on the server.

If everybody takes your advise and follows your lead your ASP business is doomed to be a bust. You should never sell something you don't believe in. First lesson of salemanship.

[Ron Carnell]

LOL. I've been breaking that particular rule for almost 25 years, Bob. So, apparently, has Bill Gates, unless you think he sincerely believes these tools we use every day are free of defect. Would you "believe in" and sell a car that crashed almost daily?

Programmers know that any complex application will likely have bugs (hidden features?), and our faith in software -- any software -- is necessarily conditional. We sell it anyway.

You don't have to believe in a product to sell it, Bob. You just have to believe in its potential. This particular product may not do everything you want, and it might do one or two things you really wished it wouldn't, but it's "close enough" and surely our NEXT version will be another step closer to perfection.

[compar]

Programmers know that any complex application will likely have bugs (hidden features?), and our faith in software -- any software -- is necessarily conditional. We sell it anyway.

You can still think that it is as good or better than anyone elses. It's called best of breed not perfection.

Also you have to look at the client's needs. Very few clients need or will ever use all the features of an application. So even thought there may be weakness in your application if the functions that this client requires are solid why can't you believe that it will fulfill his/her requirements.

I sure Bill Gates thinks that there are a hell of a lot of outstanding features in his programs -- and there is. I can't believe that even a cynic like you would sell something on the basis of sucker beware, I'm just about to sell you a load of crap.

[Ron Carnell]

You both misjudge and misunderstand me, Bob.

Whether it's the software my company sold, or the web sites I've produced since retiring, or even the posts I make in a forum like this one, I always try to give the best that is humanly possible. That's not the point. It's your implication that I have to be willing to use ASP if I'm to successfully sell ASP, and specifically your reference to the first rule of salesmanship, that I'm cynical enough to call a load of crap.

Best of breed? Isn't that just a way of saying, "I know this isn't the best we could do, but it's the best we've done so far?" Is that what you call believing in something? I'm afraid I would just call it self-justification, which is exactly where your first rule of salesmanship usually leads. Do all professional salesmen refuse to sell a Chevy because they believe a Mercedes is really the best of the breed? Nope. They change their justification to Best Value or American Made or whatever else it takes to get them out of bed in the morning. All your first rule really means is that you have to sell yourself on something before you can sell it to someone else. Human nature rarely makes that a problem.

And yea, Bob, that includes me, too. I don't have to like the ASP business model, and I don't have to feel comfortable using ASP, to believe that I can still do it better than anyone else has. I sincerely believe it's a bad choice, but I just as sincerely believe that choices, even bad ones, MUST be made available. If I fall flat on my face, it'll be because of poor implementation, not because of some hokey sales mantra.

But, hey, I'm not a salesman either, so what do I know?

[letxa2000]

Well I certainly didn't mean to trigger some heat between other forum members here.

To answer your question, Ron, if you ran an anti-spam service that a little research indicated was serious then I would have no problems having my email go through your server. If performing that service was obviously not part of your business or if it was clear you had associations with spammers then, no, I wouldn't route my email through you. But the reason we developed our own anti-spam service isn't that we didn't trust our email on the servers of other services but simply we thought we could implement it better.

The whole .Net debate is interesting but doesn't entirely apply to our service, in my opinion. .Net, it seems, is about moving applications that were traditionally (at least "recent tradition") handled locally to a server and whether that is a good idea is what you have been debating here in this thread. Email, on the other hand, has always been a networked-based application that involves an exchange of email between servers. As such, I believe the refinement and filtering of such exchanges belongs on the server rather than the client. Moving it to the client is, more than anything, moving something that has been traditionally been based on the network to the client when the current momentum in the industry is to do the exact opposite.

I think our service is as much a ".Net" solution as SMTP is. We aren't a word processor or a database, after all. We are an email filtering service and that really just makes sense to do it on the server.

Of course, if you have your own server and you are personally capable of installing available spam filters on your installation--or have people to do that for you--great! But that would indicate that you agree with me that spam should be handle on the server as opposed to the client. The secondary question is whether or not PrismEmail is something that you need. If you can install functional spam filters on your server you probably don't need us. But there are quite a few POP3 users out there that don't have the access required to install fancy tools on their server. Or they may have access but just want to get spam filtering working in 5 minutes and forget about it rather than figuring out how to install and maintain spam filters on their server. For them, PrismEmail offers them the ability to filter their spam before it reaches their client just as installing a spam filter on your server lets you filter yours before it gets to your client.

[compar]

You both misjudge and misunderstand me, Bob.

Man you're getting serious about this. Everything I have said up until now has been light hearted and in fun.

It's your implication that I have to be willing to use ASP if I'm to successfully sell ASP, and specifically your reference to the first rule of salesmanship, that I'm cynical enough to call a load of crap.

I didn't ever say you had to be willing to use ASP. What I said was that if you continue to say that you would never use it I have trouble seeing how you can expect other people to use it. It just isn't good marketing to trash what you are selling.
The "first rule" was a joke. I don't know what the hell the rules of salemanship are. I'm not preaching. I'm poking fun at best. If I misunderstand you it is because I thought you had a sense of humour and would understand the friendly banter.

Best of breed? Isn't that just a way of saying, "I know this isn't the best we could do, but it's the best we've done so far?" Is that what you call believing in something? I'm afraid I would just call it self-justification, which is exactly where your first rule of salesmanship usually leads.

Wow are you ever up tight about this. "Best of Breed" is a cliche in the business.

Do all professional salesmen refuse to sell a Chevy because they believe a Mercedes is really the best of the breed? Nope. They change their justification to Best Value or American Made or whatever else it takes to get them out of bed in the morning.

Right that is what I said. A chevy may be the best of breed for some customers depending on budget and need. It doesn't mean that all Chevy salesmen are cynics. I think that it is entirely possible to believe that a Chevy is a fine car for the money.

I don't have to like the ASP business model, and I don't have to feel comfortable using ASP, to believe that I can still do it better than anyone else has. I sincerely believe it's a bad choice, but I just as sincerely believe that choices, even bad ones, MUST be made available. If I fall flat on my face, it'll be because of poor implementation, not because of some hokey sales mantra.

Ron you are way too serious a dude. I certainly won't bother trying to have a friendly banter or conversation with you in the future. My only suggest is that you have a and chill out.

Sorry I upset you so. It really wasn't my intention.

[Mel]

FWIW I can see some advantages to filtering email on the server:

You have a direct, better than broadband connection so the downloads are much faster.

Distributing the cost of developing and maintaining an expensive piece of software across several hundred users should have some price advantages.

You are less likely to have virus in your email IF the service has an effective AV application running. (I do not consider Spam Asassin effective)

On the other hand you have an additional piece of hardware in the loop, and failure of that bit is going to deprive you of all email.


Bottom line, to me it is simple and cost effective enough to put the software on my workstation, where I can occasionally check the spam files and make sure there are no valid messages there, and of course where I have control over what I get and what I do not.