SpamPal 1.52 Beta

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rudy Ray
  • Start date Start date
R

Rudy Ray

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail.php3?fid=1038252303
SpamPal sits between your email program and your mailbox, checking your
email as you retrieve it. Any email messages that it considers to be spam
will be "tagged" with a special header; you simply configure your email
client to filter anything with this header into a separate folder and
your spam won't be mixed up with the rest of your email anymore.
 
Dans son message précédent, "Rudy Ray" a écrit :
http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail.php3?fid=1038252303
SpamPal sits between your email program and your mailbox, checking your
email as you retrieve it. Any email messages that it considers to be spam
will be "tagged" with a special header; you simply configure your email
client to filter anything with this header into a separate folder and
your spam won't be mixed up with the rest of your email anymore.
Click to expand...

Just turned back to SpamPal instead of K9 thanks to the Bayesian
plugin:

http://spampalbayes.sourceforge.net
 
"John Fitzsimons" vient de nous annoncer :
Why do you think SpamPal is better than K9 ?
Click to expand...

IMO it uses less resources and it works better with PopTray (It doesn't
ignore the Retrieve only body amount setting), I need this right now
with getting sent that Swen virus 200 times with two accounts I need to
monitor).
 
"John Fitzsimons" vient de nous annoncer :
Click to expand...
IMO it uses less resources
Click to expand...

Okay. What I don't like about SpamPal though is the DNSBL feature. As
they say themselves ;

"not everyone who uses a machine on a DNSBL list will be a spammer"

Whitelisting helps but I would prefer false positives not to occur in
the first place. Perhaps one can turn off DNSBL functionality ? If so
then both programs would presumably be fairly similar.
and it works better with PopTray (It doesn't
ignore the Retrieve only body amount setting), I need this right now
with getting sent that Swen virus 200 times with two accounts I need to
monitor).
Click to expand...

Don't know why one would need PopTray AND either of these programs.
As for Swen K9 shows the message size so deleting on the server is
pretty simple.

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.aspects.org.au/index.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/
 
Why do you think SpamPal is better than K9 ?
Click to expand...

Hi John,

I am using SpamPal v. 151. I have tried to configure SpamPal with
Avast, according to at least one set of directions:

http://www.spampal.org/usermanual/antivirus/avast/avast.htm

Gave up on that, and went back to Spampal and AVG.

I may try to configure the K9 program with Avast since many people
seem to think Avast is a better antivirus program.

Would you explain what program you are using to delete e-mails on the
server? Thank you!

Joe
 
"John Fitzsimons" avait prétendu :
Don't know why one would need PopTray AND either of these programs.
As for Swen K9 shows the message size so deleting on the server is
pretty simple.

Regards, John.
Click to expand...

I use PopTray now with K9 (decided K9 was better after all ;) because
with PopTray you can make them both work together by giving PopTray a
rule to delete the spam from server which first goes through K9.
 
"John Fitzsimons" avait prétendu :
Click to expand...
I use PopTray now with K9 (decided K9 was better after all ;) because
with PopTray you can make them both work together by giving PopTray a
rule to delete the spam from server which first goes through K9.
Click to expand...

K9 > PopTray ?

Interesting. Reminds me of

PopFile > Mailwasher at ;

http://www.computercops.biz/postt4137.html

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.aspects.org.au/index.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/
 
John Fitzsimons said:
K9 > PopTray ?

Interesting. Reminds me of

PopFile > Mailwasher at ;

http://www.computercops.biz/postt4137.html

Regards, John.
Click to expand...


Are these progs any better than mailwasher?

I can delete on the mailserver mails not from a "friend's"
list I have provided mailwasher with.

After a couple of months of watching, and having received no
useful mails from anyone not on this list, I implemented this total
delete of the crap mail. What a relief :-)

Sd
 
Are these progs any better than mailwasher?

I can delete on the mailserver mails not from a "friend's"
list I have provided mailwasher with.

After a couple of months of watching, and having received no
useful mails from anyone not on this list, I implemented this total
delete of the crap mail. What a relief :-)
Click to expand...
I agree, my needs are very simple, a few friends, like fred langa, the only
rule I'm smart enough to implement *not to me*, and M/W does it far quicker
and easier than any of the others, and I can still scan the headers for a
final decision on what to ditch.

mike r
 
Are these progs any better than mailwasher?
Click to expand...

Both K9 and PopFile are better than Mailwasher in detecting spam/no
spam because they use Bayesian (not rules based) filtering.
I can delete on the mailserver mails not from a "friend's"
list I have provided mailwasher with.
Click to expand...

K9 and PopFile can be setup with a "whitelist" too.
After a couple of months of watching, and having received no
useful mails from anyone not on this list, I implemented this total
delete of the crap mail. What a relief :-)
Click to expand...

That wouldn't suite me. I get emails from people who aren't on my
whitelists, but aren't spam either.

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.aspects.org.au/index.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/
 
I work for a real estate agency. The problem I have with Bayesian filters
is that the same words in SPAM messages are also the same words in mail
that I want to receive,just in a different context. Spampal without the
Bayesian filter is working well for me. I am not critizing K9. One just has
to choose the method that works best for one's circumstances.

Don
 
I work for a real estate agency. The problem I have with Bayesian filters
is that the same words in SPAM messages are also the same words in mail
that I want to receive,just in a different context.
Click to expand...

< snip >

Not a problem. Bayesian filtering will predominantly add weight to
words that are in the spam mails and not in your normal mail.

Words found in both spam, and ordinary mail, would NOT be deciding
factors in Bayesian filtering. They could well be in a "rules based"
system though.

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.aspects.org.au/index.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/
 
Back
Top