3 ms·

I think that number might be out of date -- and thus a bit high right now. I install sqlgrey on the mail servers I admin, and it does an amazing job of blocking

I think that number might be out of date -- and thus a bit high right now. I install sqlgrey on the mail servers I admin, and it does an amazing job of blocking spam before the MTA ever sees it. And, whereas greylisting was still a little controversial back when I worked for an ISP a handful of years ago, at a quick glance at my mail server logs it looks like it's caught on at a bunch of other providers now too. Most of the email my mail servers handle right now is legitimate.

sp332 14y ago
You have extra hardware and an entire software stack just to block spam, and you use this to argue that spam is not a big deal?
- thaumaturgy 14y ago
  Woah there, dude. I wasn't arguing that spam is not a big deal; I wasn't really arguing anything at all. I was saying that the "85-97% of all email is spam" statistic no longer jives with what I see on my servers -- at all. I'd have to whip up a quick script to munge my mail logs, but I'd expect around 90% of all messages the MTA actually handles to be legit. However, since you asked so politely: I don't have extra hardware (I think e.g. Barracuda is crap), and I wouldn't say I have an entire software stack -- just that sqlgrey & spamassassin are components of the mail server software stack that I use. I think that whether spam is a big deal or not depends a lot on the tools you use. I put a lot of time and effort initially into building a software stack that could handle spam (and other problems) more-or-less on its own, and now spend pretty close to no time at all having to personally deal with problems related to spam. Conversely, the ISP I used to work for went with a Barracuda appliance and had a pretty poor mail server configuration that they didn't want to overhaul, and AFAIK they still have to spend significant amounts of support time dealing with spam-related complaints. It could be argued that since I had to spend a lot of time and effort on the initial setup, spam is a big deal. I don't think I'd disagree with that. But, it doesn't have to be a big deal every day.
  - sp332 14y ago
    Alright I incorrectly assumed sqlgrey etc. were running on another box. But just because you filter out the spam before your MTA sees it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist! 2008: 85% http://arstechnica.com/security/2008/07/report-81-5-percent-of-all-e-mails-sent-in-june-were-spam/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2008/07/report-81-5-percent-... down to 73% in 2009 when McColo was taken out http://arstechnica.com/business/2009/03/spam-slightly-lower-in-february-but-botnets-still-lurking/ http://arstechnica.com/business/2009/03/spam-slightly-lower-... but back up to 88% by 2010 before Rustock was taken out http://arstechnica.com/security/2011/03/rustock-repercussions-spam-down-by-a-third-at-least-for-now/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2011/03/rustock-repercussion... which (last I checked) put it down to 75% again http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/04/spam-levels-still-low-a-year-after-rustock-botnet-takedown/ http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/04/spam-levels-still-lo...

sp332 14y ago

You have extra hardware and an entire software stack just to block spam, and you use this to argue that spam is not a big deal?

thaumaturgy 14y ago
Woah there, dude. I wasn't arguing that spam is not a big deal; I wasn't really arguing anything at all. I was saying that the "85-97% of all email is spam" statistic no longer jives with what I see on my servers -- at all. I'd have to whip up a quick script to munge my mail logs, but I'd expect around 90% of all messages the MTA actually handles to be legit. However, since you asked so politely: I don't have extra hardware (I think e.g. Barracuda is crap), and I wouldn't say I have an entire software stack -- just that sqlgrey & spamassassin are components of the mail server software stack that I use. I think that whether spam is a big deal or not depends a lot on the tools you use. I put a lot of time and effort initially into building a software stack that could handle spam (and other problems) more-or-less on its own, and now spend pretty close to no time at all having to personally deal with problems related to spam. Conversely, the ISP I used to work for went with a Barracuda appliance and had a pretty poor mail server configuration that they didn't want to overhaul, and AFAIK they still have to spend significant amounts of support time dealing with spam-related complaints. It could be argued that since I had to spend a lot of time and effort on the initial setup, spam is a big deal. I don't think I'd disagree with that. But, it doesn't have to be a big deal every day.
- sp332 14y ago
  Alright I incorrectly assumed sqlgrey etc. were running on another box. But just because you filter out the spam before your MTA sees it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist! 2008: 85% http://arstechnica.com/security/2008/07/report-81-5-percent-of-all-e-mails-sent-in-june-were-spam/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2008/07/report-81-5-percent-... down to 73% in 2009 when McColo was taken out http://arstechnica.com/business/2009/03/spam-slightly-lower-in-february-but-botnets-still-lurking/ http://arstechnica.com/business/2009/03/spam-slightly-lower-... but back up to 88% by 2010 before Rustock was taken out http://arstechnica.com/security/2011/03/rustock-repercussions-spam-down-by-a-third-at-least-for-now/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2011/03/rustock-repercussion... which (last I checked) put it down to 75% again http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/04/spam-levels-still-low-a-year-after-rustock-botnet-takedown/ http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/04/spam-levels-still-lo...