users who get more than there share of spam

[John Baker]

I just realized that this was not an appliance. I was confusing it with 
the Barracuda.

So what is the real advantage with this? I mean, it looks like a slicked 
up version of the open source I already use. Are there particularly good 
custom rules sets?


John Baker wrote:
> I don't know if we can afford it but its worth getting a quote. Dealing 
> with spam is such a continuous headache and time sink for me that my 
> boss is willing to reconsider his standard opposition to appliances if 
> its not outrageous.
> 
> Doing everything without spending money is actually written into my job 
> description. :)
> Julian Field wrote:
>> Can you afford a copy of BarricadeMX to run on your mail server in 
>> addition to MailScanner?
>>
>> It will pay for itself very quickly in all the hardware that you won't 
>> need to replace the next time around, as the load on the system will 
>> drop like a stone. And you can probably throw out half your MX servers 
>> too, and use the boxes for some other better purpose than processing 
>> spam. An average site redeploys half their MX servers in other roles 
>> after installing BarricadeMX on the other half.
>>
>> That's my best advice for this problem, right now.
>>
>> Jules.
>>
>> John Baker wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I wondered if any of the experts on the list had any suggestions for 
>>> this problem.
>>>
>>> I have a few users who gave their name to the wrong website and get 
>>> way more than there share of spam.  I've been trying to figure out a 
>>> way to bring those numbers down for them.
>>>
>>> Most of the spam coming through to us either doesn't make it past the 
>>> geylist or gets marked  by the Mailscanner process and then sent to a 
>>> junk folder by procmail upon delivery. These folks get hundreds in 
>>> the junk mail folder every day and hundreds per week that slip 
>>> through the process. It makes their mail unmanageable particularly as 
>>> we are in an area where many of them still have to retrieve their 
>>> mail with a 28k dialup connection when they are at home.
>>>
>>> At this point it seems as though improving the spam marking process 
>>> for us would involve spending money on external services that we 
>>> don't have to spend and it is working well enough for the average 
>>> user. Would anybody have any suggestions on how to help users who get 
>>> caught up in this sort of thing short of giving them a new address 
>>> and bouncing everything to the old one?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>
>> Jules
>>
> 
> 


-- 
John Baker
Network Systems Administrator
Marlboro College
Phone: 451-7551 off campus; 551 on campus