> > My big problem with every antispam system I've ever tried--including GMail > is inaccuracy in filtering. > Any system that tries to detect spam is going to be making a set of trade-offs - either erring on the side of false-negatives (you get spam in your inbox), or false-positives (legitimate mail gets filtered as spam). It's an evolutionary war-of-attrition - any characteristic that reliably identifies an email as spam is one spammers will change so it doesn't work anymore. The most effective solutions, such as GMail's, crowd-source the identification of spam so that relatively few users see any given spam message - that at least acknowledges the reality that there are no defining characteristics of what-is-spam (and even there, different people have different definitions of that - a one-size-fits-all solution is not going to work). But even there, it's still a war of attrition, since there are ways to make emails differ enough that they won't be identified as "the same message". It's simply not a 100% solvable problem (short of paying someone to read your inbox and manually filter the spam) - mainly you need to look at the characteristics of the different ways of mitigating it, and decide what you care about (some spam but few false-negatives, or no spam and some lost messages) and pick a solution based on that. There are no silver bullets. -Tim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.hidden-tech.net/pipermail/hidden-discuss/attachments/20150721/51000386/attachment.html