Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cookie_365
If you think about how long it takes for your own Outlook/Mailwasher/whatever rules to sort out what's (probably) spam & what isn't, then its probably only a few seconds a day for most people. Any NTL side spam filtering is unlikely to be better at spotting what's spam than your own personal rules, so it's likely that it'll be no more efficient. But multiply those few seconds by every NTL customer & you've got a huge amount of processing power requirement, which to be frank I'd rather see spent somewhere else that'll be of more benefit to most users.
|
Well, no. Firstly, there's the issue of download time, secondly, there's the issue of inboxes going over quota. My experience is currently this:
On an average day, up to 250 spam messages hit my inbox. 150 or so are from the wanadoo porn dialer spammers, the rest from assorted other *******s and sleazeballs. Even running the fantastic spampal and an aggresive set of OE rules which kill 80%+ of the crap on the server, downloading and filtering a day's worth of spam on dial-up takes rather more than a few seconds. But worse, if I go away for a couple of weeks, how long before my mailbox goes over quota and I start losing legit messages that way?
Actually, properly implemented server side spam filtering would almost certainly save ntl bandwidth and resources. For a start, the bandwidth wasted by users downloading spam would be saved.
The issue will inevitably be forced soon anyway. Think about the wanadoo dialer spammers. Presumably their strategy is to send so many messages to maximise the probability of one opening in an insecurely configured OE/IE preview pane. Just one outfit doing this has managed to come close to rendering my addy unusable. What's NTL's strategy for dealing with 10 outfits doing the same thing?