Hi all, I second the Postini mail service. It's cheap and effective. Best, Kimo AZURELINK :: "Simply Connected!" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Site Design & Scalable, Managed Web Hosting Joomla! Content Management System Implementation eCommerce Development ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 58 Cottage Street, Suite 1 Amherst, MA 01002-2125 New Telephone: (413) 306-4248 or: (413) 549-2020 (old) Fax: (413) 825-8344 For more information, please visit: www.azurelink.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Aug 26, 2008, at 8:15 AM, Matthew Crocker wrote: > ** Be sure to fill out the survey/skills inventory in the member's > area. > ** If you did, we all thank you. > > > > On Aug 25, 2008, at 4:45 PM, ussailis at shaysnet.com wrote: > >> ** Be sure to fill out the survey/skills inventory in the member's >> area. >> ** If you did, we all thank you. >> >> >> Here's an idea. >> >> Since I have become the owner of Shaysnet, I have had a chance to >> look at a >> lot of spam. What I have observed is many of my users get the same >> stuff. >> So, couldn't there be a program that says "if X users (let X be some >> reasonable number like 4) get the same mail, it is spam, therefore >> deal >> with it" > > Thousands of my users are on the same mailing lists so they get the > same messages. If I deleted identical mail after the 4th message I > would have a lot of angry customers. > >> Of course my "deal with it" would be to collect all the spam for >> one day >> and send it all back to the first spammer of that day. If enough >> ISPs did >> this... > > All spam comes from a bogus sender address and if you send the spam > back to the address in the e-mail you become a spammer yourself. > This is called a 'Joe Job' > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_job > > I switched @crocker.com & @the-spa.com over to Postini about a year > ago and haven't looked back. fighting spam was a full time job for > me, eating up huge resources in bandwidth and CPU. I used to have > 10 high end machines getting crushed by spam (greylisters, dedicated > DNS, spamassassin, anti-virus ...) now with Postini I have 4 (2 > inbound SMTP & 2 POP/IMAP toasters). I have 2 full GigE > connections to the Internet in Springfield, you would be amazed how > much bandwidth spammers could eat up if you let them. I regularly > had several hundred mbps hitting my mail servers causing a huge log > jam and backing up mail for hours. > > I'm 1000% better off letting Postini handle my inbound spam. They > have more resources (owned by Google) to both deal with the spam and > handle the legal aspects of tracking down the culprits. > > > >> >> Jim Ussailis >> >> >> >> Original Message: >> ----------------- >> From: htcontact at town-websites.com >> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:48:58 -0600 >> To: ssol at interactiveguild.com, hidden-discuss at lists.hidden-tech.net >> Subject: Re: [Hidden-tech] An Idea about Email >> >> >> ** Be sure to fill out the survey/skills inventory in the member's >> area. >> ** If you did, we all thank you. >> >> >> I think the spam problem can be best attacked on ths technical side. >> >> The protocols for email were established long before anyone >> imagined SPAM >> would become such a problem. There have been a patchwork of >> afterthought >> spam interventions, by ISPs, by email services, and at the end >> user's PC, >> but email by and large continues to use a patchwork on top of old >> protocols >> not suited to the task. I haven't ever really looked at the >> protocols, >> certainly not recently, but I think a starting point should be >> something >> like a real identity registration that can be verified, something >> like DNS >> registration, so you could tell the true source of email without >> having to >> use heuristics to guess at the identity or what the content is. >> >> Even venturing at an design gets complicated enough to require a >> task force >> and years of discussions, never mind implementation. But I think a >> better >> technology could make it easier to weed out spammers - through >> legal means >> or simpler, more accurate screening; while also having a lighter >> impact on >> small organizations and business that need reliable ability to >> contact >> their clients than the current patchwork. >> >> Charlie Heath >> Town Websites >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Hidden-discuss mailing list - home page: http://www.hidden-tech.net >> Hidden-discuss at lists.hidden-tech.net >> >> You are receiving this because you are on the Hidden-Tech >> Discussion list. >> If you would like to change your list preferences, Go to the Members >> page on the Hidden Tech Web site. >> http://www.hidden-tech.net/members >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> mail2web - Check your email from the web at >> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Hidden-discuss mailing list - home page: http://www.hidden-tech.net >> Hidden-discuss at lists.hidden-tech.net >> >> You are receiving this because you are on the Hidden-Tech >> Discussion list. >> If you would like to change your list preferences, Go to the Members >> page on the Hidden Tech Web site. >> http://www.hidden-tech.net/members > > -- > Matthew S. Crocker > President > Crocker Communications, Inc. > PO BOX 710 > Greenfield, MA 01302-0710 > > E: matthew at crocker.com > P: (413) 746-2760 > F: (413) 746-3704 > W: http://www.crocker.com > > _______________________________________________ > Hidden-discuss mailing list - home page: http://www.hidden-tech.net > Hidden-discuss at lists.hidden-tech.net > > You are receiving this because you are on the Hidden-Tech Discussion > list. > If you would like to change your list preferences, Go to the > Members page on the Hidden Tech Web site. > http://www.hidden-tech.net/members