in Open Source

ASK – solution to SPAM?

Steve has installed Active SPAM Killer (ASK), a software to prevent spammers from getting to your mailbox in the first place. Read Russ’s rant to know why simply filtering SPAM is no solution – I’m getting about 200 SPAMs a day, with SpamPal installed, but I still need to check the SPAM folder for flase positives now and then. Crap.

Here’s how it’s supposed to work:

“ASK takes advantage of the fact that most spammers use invalid or fake “From:” address in their messages. When a new message arrives and the sender is unknown, ASK sends a “confirmation message” back, informing the sender that the original message has been queued, pending confirmation. When the sender confirms (a simple reply), ASK delivers the original message and adds the sender to a “whitelist”. Further messages from this sender will be immediately delivered. It is also possible to ignore messages based on specific criteria, like sender’s email, subject and so on.”

I’m considering this as well – I want to move my home server to Linux, anyway.

Leave a Reply

  1. My take is at http://blog.koehntopp.de/archives/155_Fighting_Spam.html – if there was a simple, obvious and working solution to Spam, it would have already arrived.

    Most simple solutions are broken by design. This includes all CR-schemes. Others have severe problems because they break certain functionality in existing mail, as SPF does (SPF does break bouncing, and has not answered fully the question how it will avoid to increase the probability of mail loops in forwarding scenarios).

    At the moment, filtering is the only solution that does work (most of the time). Everything else is at least as much part of the problem space as it is part of the solution space.

  2. My take is at http://blog.koehntopp.de/archives/155_Fighting_Sp… – if there was a simple, obvious and working solution to Spam, it would have already arrived.

    Most simple solutions are broken by design. This includes all CR-schemes. Others have severe problems because they break certain functionality in existing mail, as SPF does (SPF does break bouncing, and has not answered fully the question how it will avoid to increase the probability of mail loops in forwarding scenarios).

    At the moment, filtering is the only solution that does work (most of the time). Everything else is at least as much part of the problem space as it is part of the solution space.

Webmentions

  • DeveloperZen.com March 31, 2004

    Constant Bearing, Decreasing Range [IMG] Doing My Little Part- Weblog of Mark Finnern [IMG] Information Arbitrage [IMG] Software Alphabet Soup [IMG] The Village View [IMG] theotherthomasotter [IMG] Venture Chronicles [IMG] http://www.gadgetguy.de – The GadgetGuy [IMG] Yet Another Software Blog

  • DeveloperZen.com March 31, 2004

    [IMG] Constant Bearing, Decreasing Range [IMG] Doing My Little Part- Weblog of Mark Finnern [IMG] Software Alphabet Soup [IMG] The Village View [IMG] theotherthomasotter [IMG] Venture Chronicles [IMG] http://www.gadgetguy.de – The GadgetGuy [IMG] Yet Another Software Blog

  • DeveloperZen.com March 31, 2004

    [IMG] Constant Bearing, Decreasing Range [IMG] Doing My Little Part- Weblog of Mark Finnern [IMG] Software Alphabet Soup [IMG] The Village View [IMG] theotherthomasotter [IMG] Venture Chronicles [IMG] http://www.gadgetguy.de – The GadgetGuy [IMG] Yet Another Software Blog