This is topic Washing Mail with a Mac in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=002118

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 06-04-2003, 05:56 AM:
 
A Mac-owning friend has asked me for tips on spam prevention. My solution is to screen my incoming e-mail using Mailwasher, but that's not available for the Mac.

Does anyone know of any software which does a similar job, i.e. view the incoming mail sitting on your POP3 server without downloading it, and delete and/or bounce offending messages first? Many thanks in advance...
 

---

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 06-04-2003, 09:13 AM:
 
I've been using Mailwasher for a couple of months and I love it. Nothing like being able to bounce spam (even if it doesn't do any good)
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-04-2003, 09:21 AM:
 
The current anti-spam software of choice is Spamassassin: http://spamassassin.org/ It works by assigning a "score" to each message based upon characteristics which correlate highly with spam (e.g. subject lines in all caps, the use of the word "free," etc.). The user can then set the threshold (score above which mail will be tagged as spam) manually and then configure his mail client or other mail filtering software to handle the presumed-spam as desired (trash, bounce, send to a specific mailbox, etc.)

It's primarily designed to run on Unix variants, so you could "probably" run it on your Mac if you have Perl, procmail, and fetchmail installed. Alternatively, see if your ISP offers shell accounts and procmail access.
 

---

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 06-04-2003, 02:09 PM:
 
Tell him to upgrade to Mac OS X Jaguar. It has verry solid spam filtration built in.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-04-2003, 06:43 PM:
 
Macs are not capable of receiving, sending, or viewing e-mail.

But if your friend must, he can go to www.versiontracker.com and select the tab for the OS he uses. Type in "spam" in the search box and check out what is available.
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 06-04-2003, 07:37 PM:
 
I normally hate SPAMS like all of you but I received one from a woman who runs a small Web design company in Nova Scotia, Canada early last week. She had a very special offer for a hundred fifty photographers in the United States for a custom designed website for $200.00. Although I already have a website, the offer interested me very much and before you know it, there was my very own specially designed sample home page right in front of me on my computer screen and I was very impressed with the work she did. To check out her credibility, I turned to her links and found a photographer in Arizona who had used Lucie to design her site . Lianne, the photographer could not stop telling me how pleased she was with what Lucie had created and that sold me. Just by seeing what she has done for me already, I know I will be happy with her services. My new site should be up by the middle of next week. So guys and gals, there will be times when you can come across some good SPAM.

Anyboby in the mood for a Spam Musubi (A Rice ball with a slice of Spam on the top)?

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Chris Markiewicz (Member # 1415) on 06-04-2003, 08:27 PM:
 
Oh, Claude...
 

---

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 06-04-2003, 11:00 PM:
 
Oh, dear. I can't resist the urge to rant.

BAD, CLUADE, BAD !

Never EVER buy something from a spam ad! It only encourages them to send more!

There is no such thing as good spam. You can always use google or something to look for the services you want. Who knows? Sometimes you'll find something even better for less money!
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-05-2003, 12:24 AM:
 
What Mike said.

Spammers _steal_ my resources every day. Every spam message that I receive (over 100 per day at this point...if it weren't for Spamassassin, I'd never have time to get to my legitimate mail) uses up my bandwidth, disk space, tape space (for backups), and time. Most likely, the spammer is also stealing bandwidth from some misconfigured mail server ("open mail relay") to get his spam to me. Spam costs me real money every day and I'm not happy about it.

Reputable sales organizations do not steal other people's resources and thus do not send spam. I will never do business with spammers, nor will any company which employs me. I don't buy from thieves.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 06-05-2003, 06:40 AM:
 
Many thanks for all your responses. I think I'll go with telling her to go with Mac OS X, because my friend is not a technically minded person. She opted for a Mac precisely because it was an out-of-the-box and switch on solution for wordprocessing and the like.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-05-2003, 10:45 AM:
 
Oh, there are all sorts of spam filters for Mac!

<Spins around in chair... Reaches for bookshelf... Pulls out a copy of Macworld magazine. (April 2003-USA) Scans pages... (Page 60)...>

What do you want? Boolean filter? Bayesian filter? Points filter? DNS Blacklists? Pre-download? Post-download?

Macworld rates "SpamSieve" as the top contender. (4 mice)
It uses Bayesian filters, post download and was tested with an accuracy of 82% with only one false positive. They say it costs $20. (USA)
Check it out at THIS website.
Free demo available.

The second contender is almost a toss up between "SpamFire" and "Post Armor". PostArmor is a pre-download filter that catches spam by looking at the headers of your e-mails on the server before you go through the trouble of downloading it. Check it out at THIS website. The article says it is free for use with a single e-mail account!

[ 06-05-2003, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Randy Stankey ]
 

---

Posted by Matt Hale (Member # 1518) on 06-05-2003, 11:21 AM:
 
Spamnix is a plugin that beefs up the somewhat lacking spam filter in Eudora. Works on both Mac OS X and Windows versions of Eudora. I dont use it myself, but I know a few people who swear by it.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 06-05-2003, 01:13 PM:
 
Thanks Randy; PostArmor is exactly what we had in mind: a pre-download mail vetting program which allows you to kill spam and virus emails from the POP3 server. From the website I see that the only thing it won't do which Mailwasher will is bounce.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-05-2003, 01:17 PM:
 
Glad I could help! Hey! Ya' can't beat the price, either!

Also check out THIS little program at Versiontracker.com.

It's a neat little anti-spyware device that prevents programs from "phoning home" on you without you knowing. I find that once I installed it my spam went down by at least half. A lot of spam has HTML, links or URLs, etc in it that lets the home server know that somebody received the message even if they trash the message. Of course, you can turn off the preview pane in your e-mail program but that prevents you from seeing what the e-mail you are getting contains unless you open the message. It's a good little tool to have handy.

My other anti-spam trick is to tell Eudora to look at the e-mail's headers and immediately toss out all e-mails that contain HTML which come from people who aren't in my address book. (I use IMAP for my main e-mail account so Eudora can look at the headers without downloading.) That knocks out another 20% of my spam messages right there. Since my computer never downloads the HTML.

With "Little Snitch" and Eudora's filters I only get about 1/2 dozen spams a day on average. Some days I don't get any. I also use most of the old anti-spam tricks like "Don't publicize your real e-mail address".
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 06-05-2003, 01:47 PM:
 
I too use Eudora and especially like the 'disable HTML executable content within messages' option (which is especially useful for stopping viruses which exploit the OE preview pane trigger). A combination of that and Mailwasher keeps the spam under control for me. I agree on keeping a really private e-mail address to. I have three in fact: one for work which is publicised and on our website (ergo e-mail harvesting programs can get at it), one personal which I will give anyone (which is the one I registered on this site with), and a further address which I only give to relatives, close friends and people I know and trust. It doesn't appear on the WWW in any way at all, and has so far remained spam free.

Thanks again...
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-05-2003, 03:00 PM:
 
My mother is learning how to use a computer for e-mail. She thinks sending HTML e-mails is fun. I often get messages from her with pictures of butterflies and things in the background. Thus, I leave the HTML display on most of the time.

My trick is to write a regular filter rule that says:
IF {Incoming Mail} {Header} contains "HTML"
AND {Sender} {Does not intersect} {Address Book}
THEN {Transfer to Trash}.

Since I use IMAP for my main personal account I don't have to download the whole message to see whether it contains HTML. That information is in the header. Any message that contains HTML which comes from somebody I don't put in my address book doesn't even get downloaded but sent directly to the (server's) trash.
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 06-05-2003, 03:12 PM:
 
Scott,

How can you say "Reputaple people and companies do not send Spams? I did not know companies like Nikon, Palm, Columbia House, BMG Music, MGM Home Video, and many others like them are not reputable companies and I should never buy their products. As a professional photographer, I have been using Nikon equipment long before you were even born and my Palm Pilot IIIc PDA has always kept me informed about my daily appointments and activities for years and I would be lost without it. As a classical music lover, I joined the BMG Music club and through them bought a lot of CDs and received very good service and lots of free CDs. MGM has been keeping me informed about their new releases on DVD and movie theatres and the information was very much appreciated.
The best Spam of all was CinemaScore when they used to send me reports for a year for free and when the year was up, they asked me if I wanted to join. I did not because the same information is on their web site. I have also received a Spam from a company who do research work locating long lost classmates and just for fun I answered their questions and my name was listed and I already heard from two of my high school classmates I have not seen since high school and I did not pay this company a dime although they wish I would join by giving them my credit card number.

Unlike many of you who receive hundreds a day, the most I have received was no more than ten a day and like junk mail I get in my postal mailbox, I immediately toss out the ones that do not interest me and check those that do. Scott, just because people like you and Mike do not like Spams does not give you the right to belittle me because I have responded to some of them. I am not a fool and have never been taken advantage of by responding to the spam messages that did interest me. I have been using the internet for many years and it has given me a lot of pleasure but there is one thing that has always turned me off and that is the negative mentality found on the various DVD and movie forums from people like you and Mike.

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-05-2003, 03:45 PM:
 
Claude--please don't interpret my earlier post as a personal attack (it was not intended as such).

My point was just that I don't like it when people use my resources to subsidize their advertising without my permission.

I should also point out that spam (as it applies to the email context) is normally defined as "unsolicited commercial email." Thus, newsletters and promotional mailings which you have ASKED to receive aren't spam. If, however, you receive mail of a commercial nature which you didn't request (either directly or by having some sort of prior business relationship with the sender), then it is spam, at least by the commonly used definitions.

The difference between email spam and postal "junk mail" is twofold: first, email spam costs almost zero to send and thus there is no reason for the sender to limit the number of recipients (in fact, it is in his interest to spam the largest number of people possible); second, email spam costs me money to receive (in disk space, bandwidth, CPU time, etc.), while postal "junk mail" costs me nothing to receive and also helps to subsidize postal rates for everyone (if there were no postal "junk mail," then standard US mail rates would be significantly higher than they now are). I'm not advocating postal "junk mail" here, but rather am pointing out that email spam is the worse of two evils.

If you like receiving email advertisments, that's great. Please go ahead and sign up for all manner of legitimate opt-in lists. Spam needs to be outlawed, but that won't prevent you and others who want to receive it from doing so by choice.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 06-06-2003, 11:28 AM:
 

quote:

---

Spam needs to be outlawed...

---